Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
14-04-03 Apple Motion to Present Evidence and for Curative Instructions

14-04-03 Apple Motion to Present Evidence and for Curative Instructions

Ratings: (0)|Views: 12,691 |Likes:
Published by Florian Mueller

More info:

Published by: Florian Mueller on Apr 03, 2014
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

04/05/2014

pdf

text

original

 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
A
PPLE
I
 NC
.’
S
M
OTION
F
OR
E
VIDENCE
T
HAT
A
PPLE
P
RACTICES
I
TS
P
ATENTS
A
 ND
C
URATIVE
I
 NSTRUCTIONS
Case No. 12-cv-00630-LHK
JOSH A. KREVITT (CA SBN 208552) jkrevitt@gibsondunn.com H. MARK LYON (CA SBN 162061) mlyon@gibsondunn.com GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 1881 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304-1211 Telephone: (650) 849-5300 Facsimile: (650) 849-5333 HAROLD J. McELHINNY (CA SBN 66781) hmcelhinny@mofo.com JAMES P. BENNETT (CA SBN 65179)  jbennett@mofo.com JACK W. LONDEN (CA SBN 85776)  jlonden@mofo.com RACHEL KREVANS (CA SBN 116421) rkrevans@mofo.com RUTH N. BORENSTEIN (CA SBN 133797) rborenstein@mofo.com ERIK J. OLSON (CA SBN 175815) ejolson@mofo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant APPLE INC.WILLIAM F. LEE william.lee@wilmerhale.com WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 60 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Telephone: (617) 526-6000 Facsimile: (617) 526-5000 MARK D. SELWYN (SBN 244180) mark.selwyn@wilmerhale.com WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 950 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 Telephone: (650) 858-6000 Facsimile: (650) 858-6100 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT  NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION APPLE INC., a California corporation,Plaintiff, v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a Korean corporation; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New York corporation; and SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Defendants. Case No.12-cv-00630-LHK 
APPLE INC.’S MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO PRESENT EVIDENCE THAT APPLE PRACTICES THE ’414, ’172, AND ’959 PATENTS AND CURATIVE INSTRUCTIONS
Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1567 Filed04/03/14 Page1 of 11
 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
A
PPLE
I
 NC
.’
S
M
OTION
F
OR
E
VIDENCE
T
HAT
A
PPLE
P
RACTICES
I
TS
P
ATENTS
A
 ND
C
URATIVE
I
 NSTRUCTIONS
Case No. 12-cv-00630-LHK
1 
NOTICE OF MOTION
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff Apple Inc. (“Apple”) shall and hereby does move the Court, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7, for permission to present testimony and evidence demonstrating that Apple practices the asserted patents and curative instructions on the grounds that Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Samsung Electronics America, Inc.; and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) made prejudicial and false statements during opening statements that have unfairly prejudiced Apple. This motion is based on this notice of motion and supporting memorandum, the supporting Declaration of Erik J. Olson, and such other written or oral argument as may be  presented at or before the time this motion is taken under submission by the Court.
RELIEF REQUESTED
Apple seeks an Order permitting Apple to present testimony and evidence demonstrating that Apple has practiced and continues to practice the ’414, ’172, and ’959 patents in order to correct the false impressions created by Samsung’s counsel. Apple also requests that the Court recognize Apple’s continuing objection to any further misleading or false statements by Samsung. And Apple asks the Court to issue curative instructions, both now and with the final  jury instructions, to curtail the harm and prejudice caused by Samsung’s improper statements to the jury. Dated: April 3, 2014
 /s/ Harold J. McElhinny
 Harold J. McElhinny
Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1567 Filed04/03/14 Page2 of 11
 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
A
PPLE
I
 NC
.’
S
M
OTION
F
OR
E
VIDENCE
T
HAT
A
PPLE
P
RACTICES
I
TS
P
ATENTS
A
 ND
C
URATIVE
I
 NSTRUCTIONS
Case No. 12-cv-00630-LHK
2 
MEMORANDUM I. INTRODUCTION
During opening statements, Samsung’s counsel repeatedly made irrelevant, misleading, and even untrue statements that have undoubtedly caused the jury to form impressions that are highly prejudicial to Apple. Over and over again, Samsung’s counsel represented that Apple has never practiced the ’414, ’172, and ’959 patents—even though, as Samsung knows, Apple has sold and continues to sell products that use each of Apple’s asserted patents. The Court’s order limiting Apple’s ability to contend that it practices the ’414, ’172, and ’959 patents at trial does not (and cannot) permit Samsung to affirmatively present false factual statements to the  jury; but now that Samsung has done precisely that, Apple should be permitted to respond with testimony and evidence demonstrating that Apple practices those patents. Samsung’s counsel also improperly suggested to the jury that it should consider the fact that Apple may seek  permanent injunctive relief—which is irrelevant to the issues that the jury is being asked to decide and extremely prejudicial to Apple. And finally, Samsung’s counsel misrepresented the Federal Circuit’s preliminary injunction decision in a way that, again, is highly prejudicial to Apple. Samsung’s repetition of these misleading and untruthful statements has unfairly  prejudiced Apple at the outset of the trial. As set forth below, Apple requests that the Court: (1) permit Apple to present testimony and evidence demonstrating that Apple has practiced and continues to practice the ’414, ’172, and ’959 patents in order to correct the false impressions created by Samsung’s counsel; (2) recognize Apple’s continuing objection to any further misleading or false statements by Samsung; and (3) issue curative instructions, both now and again with the final jury instructions, to curtail the harm and prejudice caused by Samsung’s improper statements to the jury.
II. ARGUMENT A. Samsung’s False Statements Regarding Whether Apple Practices The ’414, ’172, And ’959 Patents Are Highly Prejudicial To Apple And Require Curative Action.
Apple has sold and continues to sell products that include embodiments of all five
Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1567 Filed04/03/14 Page3 of 11

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->