Case: 12-1548

Document: 56

Page: 1

Filed: 12/04/2012

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

No. 2012-1548 APPLE INC. AND NEXT SOFTWARE, INC., Appellants, v. MOTOROLA MOBILITY, LLC AND MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC., Cross-Appellants. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Case No. 11-cv-08650, Judge Richard Posner MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC., AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ADVERTISING AGENCIES, AND FORD MOTOR COMPANY AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF NEITHER PARTY
CRAIG SILLIMAN GAIL F. LEVINE VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. 1320 North Court House Rd. Arlington, VA 22201 (703) 351-3028 WILLIAM J. COUGHLIN FORD MOTOR COMPANY One American Rd. Dearborn, MI 48126 (313) 322-7726 PAUL D. CLEMENT D. ZACHARY HUDSON BANCROFT PLLC 1919 M Street, N.W., Suite 470 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 234-0090 Counsel for Amici Curiae Verizon Communications Inc., American Association of Advertising Agencies, and Ford Motor Company

December 4, 2012

Case: 12-1548
Form 9 FORM 9. Certicate of Interest

Document: 56

Page: 2

Filed: 12/04/2012

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

Apple Inc. Motorola Mobility, LLC ____________________________ v. ____________________________ 2012-1548 No. _______

CERTIFICATE OF INTEREST
Counsel for the (petitioner) (appellant) (respondent) (appellee) (amicus) (name of party)
Amicus Verizon Communications Inc. _______________________

certifies the following (use None if applicable; use extra sheets

if necessary): 1. The full name of every party or amicus represented by me is: Verizon Communications Inc. _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 2. The name of the real party in interest (if the party named in the caption is not the real party in interest) represented by me is: Verizon Communications Inc. _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. All parent corporations and any publicly held companies that own 10 percent or more of the stock of the party or amicus curiae represented by me are: None _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 4. The names of all law firms and the partners or associates that appeared for the party or amicus now represented by me in the trial court or agency or are expected to appear in this court are: _____________________________________________________________________________ Bancroft PLLC: Paul D. Clement; D. Zachary Hudson _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________ 12/4/2012 Date _______________________________ /s/Paul D. Clement Signature of counsel _______________________________ Paul D. Clement Printed name of counsel Please Note: All questions must be answered Counsel cc: All ___________________________________

124

Case: 12-1548
Form 9 FORM 9. Certicate of Interest

Document: 56

Page: 3

Filed: 12/04/2012

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

Apple Inc. Motorola Mobility, LLC ____________________________ v. ____________________________ 2012-1548 No. _______

CERTIFICATE OF INTEREST
Counsel for the (petitioner) (appellant) (respondent) (appellee) (amicus) (name of party)
Amicus American Association of Advertising Agencies

_______________________ certifies the following (use None if applicable; use extra sheets if necessary): 1. The full name of every party or amicus represented by me is:

American Association of Advertising Agencies _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 2. The name of the real party in interest (if the party named in the caption is not the real party in interest) represented by me is: American Association of Advertising Agencies _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. All parent corporations and any publicly held companies that own 10 percent or more of the stock of the party or amicus curiae represented by me are: None _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 4. The names of all law firms and the partners or associates that appeared for the party or amicus now represented by me in the trial court or agency or are expected to appear in this court are: _____________________________________________________________________________ Bancroft PLLC: Paul D. Clement; D. Zachary Hudson _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________ 12/4/2012 Date _______________________________ /s/Paul D. Clement Signature of counsel _______________________________ Paul D. Clement Printed name of counsel Please Note: All questions must be answered Counsel cc: All ___________________________________

124

Case: 12-1548
Form 9 FORM 9. Certicate of Interest

Document: 56

Page: 4

Filed: 12/04/2012

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

Apple Inc. Motorola Mobility, LLC ____________________________ v. ____________________________ 2012-1548 No. _______

CERTIFICATE OF INTEREST
Counsel for the (petitioner) (appellant) (respondent) (appellee) (amicus) (name of party)
Amicus Ford Motor Company certifies the following (use None if applicable; use extra sheets _______________________

if necessary): 1. The full name of every party or amicus represented by me is: Ford Motor Company _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 2. The name of the real party in interest (if the party named in the caption is not the real party in interest) represented by me is: Ford Motor Company _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. All parent corporations and any publicly held companies that own 10 percent or more of the stock of the party or amicus curiae represented by me are: There are publicly-traded corporations that may, from time to time, own more than 10% _____________________________________________________________________________ of Fords stock as trustee or independent fiduciary for various employee plans. The _____________________________________________________________________________ most recent trustee owner in this capacity is State Street Corporation. _____________________________________________________________________________ 4. The names of all law firms and the partners or associates that appeared for the party or amicus now represented by me in the trial court or agency or are expected to appear in this court are: _____________________________________________________________________________ Bancroft PLLC: Paul D. Clement; D. Zachary Hudson _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________ 12/4/2012 Date _______________________________ /s/Paul D. Clement Signature of counsel _______________________________ Paul D. Clement Printed name of counsel Please Note: All questions must be answered Counsel cc: All ___________________________________

124

Case: 12-1548

Document: 56

Page: 5

Filed: 12/04/2012

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE Amici respectfully move the Court, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29(b), for leave to file the brief submitted herewith in support of neither party. Amici curiae have important business relationships with both parties to this case and take no position on the underlying merits of their patent dispute. Nonetheless, because Judge Posners opinion speaks to profoundly important issues, amici seek to file their brief to address the critical questions of when injunctive relief is warranted as a remedy for infringement and how to properly calculate reasonable royalty damages. Amici have a strong interest in a balanced system of patent remedies that discourages infringement and protects legitimate property rights while avoiding the harmful effects of over-deterrence that threaten innovation and the public interest. In order for the patent system to foster innovation and avoid distorting competition, it must employ remedies that replicate the reward the patentee would have earned absent infringement. Making injunctive relief available in suits

involving RAND-encumbered standards-essential patents and patents that read on only a minor component in a multi-component device does far more. It allows patentees to capture more than the economic value of their patentsthey are able to obtain the costs of after-the-fact switching (if switching is indeed an option) to noninfringing alternatives. By the same token, awarding reasonable royalty

Case: 12-1548

Document: 56

Page: 6

Filed: 12/04/2012

damages in an amount exceeding the value of the patented technology over alternatives at the time of design allows patentees to obtain profits in excess of the economic value of their inventive contribution. That overcompensation injures competition, threatens innovation, and is fundamentally inconsistent with the patent bargain. In amicis view, Judge Posner correctly concluded that injunctive relief should be unavailable when the patent in suit is RAND-encumbered. In the same vein, Judge Posners submission that injunctive relief should not be awarded when the patent at issue reads on only a minor component in a multi-component device is well-grounded in traditional equitable principles and sound economic methodology. Furthermore, as Judge Posner suggests, the correct measure of reasonable royalty damages is constrained by the value of the patented technology over alternatives at the time of the design decision. Amici believe that their friend-of-the-court brief will assist the Court in understanding the importance of the issues at stake in this case. Accordingly, amici respectfully move that the Court grant leave to file the brief of amici curiae submitted herewith. Respectfully submitted,

Case: 12-1548

Document: 56

Page: 7

Filed: 12/04/2012

Craig Silliman Gail F. Levine Verizon Communications Inc. 1320 North Court House Rd. Arlington, VA 22201 (703) 351-3028 William J. Coughlin Ford Motor Company One American Rd. Dearborn, MI 48126 (313) 322-7726

/s/ Paul D. Clement Paul D. Clement D. Zachary Hudson Bancroft PLLC 1919 M Street, N.W., Suite 470 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 234-0090 Counsel for Amici Curiae Verizon Communications Inc., American Association of Advertising Agencies, and Ford Motor Company

December 4, 2012

Case: 12-1548

Document: 56

Page: 8

Filed: 12/04/2012

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

No. 2012-1548 APPLE INC. AND NEXT SOFTWARE, INC., Appellants, v. MOTOROLA MOBILITY, LLC AND MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC., Cross-Appellants. ON MOTION [PROPOSED] ORDER Upon consideration of the motion of Verizon Communications Inc., American Association of Advertising Agencies, and Ford Motor Company as amici curiae in support of neither party, the Court finds that the proposed brief will assist in deciding this case. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that leave to file an amicus curiae brief is GRANTED. FOR THE COURT DATE:_________________ _________________________ United States Court of Appeals For the Federal Circuit

Case: 12-1548

Document: 56

Page: 9

Filed: 12/04/2012

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, D. Zachary Hudson, hereby certify that on December 4, 2012, I electronically served a copy of the foregoing motion for leave to file a brief as amici curiae on behalf of Verizon Communications Inc., American Association of Advertising Agencies, and Ford Motor Company in support of neither party via the Courts CM/ECF system on the following:

Case: 12-1548

Document: 56

Page: 10

Filed: 12/04/2012

E. Joshua Rosenkrantz Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP 51 West 52nd Street New York, NY 10019 (212) 506-5380 Mark S. Davies, Esq. Katherine M. Kopp Rachel M. McKenzie T. Vann Pearce, Jr. Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliff LLP Columbia Center 1152 15th Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 (202) 339-8500 Brian E. Ferguson Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 1300 I Street, NW Suite 900 Washington, DC 20005 Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellants Apple, Inc., Next Software, Inc., FKA NeXT Computer, Inc.

David A. Nelson Stephen A. Swedlow Amanda Scott Williamson Quinn, Emanuel, Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP Suite 2450 500 West Madison Street Chicago, IL 60661 (312) 705-7465 Brian Cosmo Cannon Quinn, Emanuel, Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP 5th Floor 555 Twin Dolphin Drive Redwood Shores, CA 94065 (650) 801-5000 Raymond N. Nimrod Quinn, Emanuel, Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP 51 Madison Ave. 22nd Floor New York, NY 10010 (212) 849-7412 Counsel for Defendants-Cross Appellants Motorola, Inc., NKA Motorola Solutions, Inc., Motorola Mobility, Inc.

/s/D. Zachary Hudson D. Zachary Hudson