Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 294

NOTICE by Motorola Mobility, Inc. re 292 Response/Reply (Other) of filing Declaration by John Duchemin in Support of Opposition to Apple's Motion to Compel (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit John Duchemin Declaration in Support of Opposition to Motion to Compel)(Herrera, Sujey)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case No. 1:10cv023580-Civ-RNS-TEB

MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

APPLE INC.,
Defendant.

APPLE INC.,
Counterclaim Plaintiff,
v.
MOTOROLA, INC. and
MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.,
Counterclaim Defendants.

DECLARATION OF JOHN DUCHEMIN IN SUPPORT OF MOTOROLA’S
OPPOSITION TO APPLE’S MOTION TO COMPEL
FURTHER SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORY NOS. 19-22

02426.51753/4686884.1

1

I, John Duchemin, declare:
I am a member of the bar of the State of California, admitted pro hac vice in this
action and an associate with Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, attorneys for Motorola
Mobility, Inc. and Motorola Solutions, Inc. (f/k/a Motorola, Inc.) (collectively "Motorola"). I
make this declaration of personal, firsthand knowledge, and if called and sworn as a witness, I
could and would testify competently to the matters contained in this declaration.
1.

Attached as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of Apple’s Third Set of

Interrogatories to Motorola Mobility and Motorola (Nos. 16-22).
2.

Attached as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of an e-mail I received

from Apple counsel Arjun Mehra on March 27, 2012.
3.

Attached as Exhibit 3 is a true and correct copy of an e-mail from myself

to Mr. Mehra that I sent on March 27, 2012. Attached as Exhibit 4 is a true and correct copy of
Motorola’s Second Supplemental Responses to Apple’s Third Set of Interrogatories to Motorola
Mobility, which I attached to that e-mail
4.

Attached as Exhibit 5 is a true and correct copy of an e-mail I received

from Mr. Mehra on March 28, 2012.
5.

Attached as Exhibit 6 is a true and correct copy of an e-mail I received

from Mr. Mehra on March 28, 2012.
6.

Attached as Exhibit 7 is a true and correct copy of an e-mail I received

from Mr. Mehra on April 2, 2012.
7.

In order to supplement its Second Supplemental Responses to Apple’s

Interrogatory Nos. 19-22, Motorola gathered information from several departments and a number
of Motorola employees. Motorola spent more than a week compiling this information, which

02426.51753/4686884.1

2

came from several different sources, and cross-checking it for accuracy. As a result, Motorola
was only in a position to supplement its responses to Interrogatory Nos. 19-22 as of March 27,
2012.
8.

After Motorola informed Apple on Thursday, March 22, 2012 that its

Second Supplemental Responses to Apple’s Interrogatory Nos. 19-22 would be coming
“shortly,” Apple never objected to Motorola’s proposed schedule, never asked for a date certain
by which Motorola would serve its Second Supplemental Responses,.and never informed
Motorola that it would seek to move to compel on these issues.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the
foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 2nd day of April 2012 at Oakland, California.

/s/ John Duchemin
John Duchemin

02426.51753/4686884.1

3