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
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
11-11-22 Samsung Motion to Dismiss Apple's Amended FRAND Counterclaims

11-11-22 Samsung Motion to Dismiss Apple's Amended FRAND Counterclaims

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,121|Likes:
Published by Florian Mueller
Samsung motion of November 22, 2011 to dismiss Apple's amended FRAND counterclaims of November 8, 2011.
Samsung motion of November 22, 2011 to dismiss Apple's amended FRAND counterclaims of November 8, 2011.

More info:

Published by: Florian Mueller on Nov 23, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

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

10/04/2013

pdf

text

original

 
1

 
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
 
SAMSUNG'S MOTION TO DISMISS APPLE'S COUNTERCLAIMS
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLPCharles K. Verhoeven (Bar No. 170151)charlesverhoeven@quinnemanuel.com 50 California Street, 22
 
nd
FloorSan Francisco, California 94111Telephone: (415) 875-6600Facsimile: (415) 875-6700Kevin P.B. Johnson (Bar No. 177129)kevinjohnson@quinnemanuel.com Victoria F. Maroulis (Bar No. 202603) victoriamaroulis@quinnemanuel.com 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5
 
th
FloorRedwood Shores, California 94065-2139Telephone: (650) 801-5000Facsimile: (650) 801-5100Michael T. Zeller (Bar No. 196417)michaelzeller@quinnemanuel.com 865 S. Figueroa St., 10th FloorLos Angeles, California 90017Telephone: (213) 443-3000Facsimile: (213) 443-3100Attorneys for SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO.,LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,INC. and SAMSUNGTELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLCUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTNORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISIONAPPLE INC., a California corporation,Plaintiff,vs.SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., aKorean business entity; SAMSUNGELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a NewYork corporation; SAMSUNGTELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,Defendant.CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG
S MOTION TO DISMISSAPPLE
S COUNTERCLAIMSDate: April 5, 2012Time: 1:30 p.m.Place: Courtroom 8, 4th FloorJudge: Hon. Lucy H. Koh
 
Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document405 Filed11/22/11 Page1 of 30
 
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
 
-i-
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
 
SAMSUNG'S MOTION TO DISMISS APPLE'S COUNTERCLAIMS
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION .......................................................................................... 1MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES .................................................................. 2INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 2FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ...................................................................... 3I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY .................................................................................................. 3II.
APPLE‘S ALLEGATIONS
REGARDING SECTION TWO OF THE SHERMANACT ....................................................................................................................................... 5A.
 
Apple Defines the Relevant Market Solely According to the Scope of 
Samsung‘s Declared
-Essential Patents and Their Incorporation in the ETSIStandard ..................................................................................................................... 5B. Apple Contends That Samsung Delayed Its Disclosure of Essential Patents,
Inducing ETSI To Incorporate Samsung‘s Patents into the UMTS Standard
........... 6III.
 
APPLE‘S ALLEGATIONS
REGARDING DECLARATORY JUDGMENT THATAPPLE IS LICENSED TO
SAMSUNG‘S DECLARED E
SSENTIAL PATENTS ............ 7IV.
APPLE‘S ALLEGATIONS
REGARDING PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL ........................... 7V.
APPLE‘S ALLEGATIONS
REGARDING UNFAIR COMPETITION .............................. 8ARGUMENT .................................................................................................................................... 8I. LEGAL STANDARD ........................................................................................................... 8A.
 
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6): Dismissal of Implausible Claims ...................................... 8II.
 
APPLE FAILS TO PLEAD FACTS SUFFICIENT TO GRANT RELIEFPURSUANT TO SECTION 2 OF THE SHERMAN ACT .................................................. 9A.
 
An Antitrust Litigant Must Allege a ―Relevant Market‖
.......................................... 9B. Apple Has Failed To Allege Any Cognizable Market in which SamsungHas Power and Has Failed To Allege Any Measure of Market Share at All .......... 11III.
 
APPLE‘S ALLEGATIONS
OF ANTICOMPETITIVE CONDUCT REMAININSUFFICIENT .................................................................................................................. 12IV. APPLE FAILS TO PLEAD FACTS SUFFICIENT TO GRANT RELIEF FORBREACH OF CONTRACT OR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT THAT APPLE IS
LICENSED TO SAMSUNG‘
S DECLARED-ESSENTIAL PATENTS ............................ 14A.
 
Under California Law, Apple‘s Pleadings Fail To Establish the Formation
of a Valid Contract .................................................................................................. 15
Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document405 Filed11/22/11 Page2 of 30
 
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
 
-ii-
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
 
SAMSUNG'S MOTION TO DISMISS APPLE'S COUNTERCLAIMS
1.
 
Samsung‘s Declaration to ETSI Was Not an Offer To License
.................. 162. Apple Admits that the Parties Never Concluded a LicenseAgreement ................................................................................................... 17B.
 
Under French Law, Apple‘s Pleadings Fa
il To Establish the Formation of aValid Contract ......................................................................................................... 18C. Samsung Did Not Breach a Contract with ETSI ..................................................... 19V.
 
APPLE FAILS TO PLEAD FACTS SUFFICIENT TO GRANT RELIEF FORPROMISSORY ESTOPPEL ............................................................................................... 21VI. APPLE FAILS TO PLEAD FACTS SUFFICIENT TO GRANT RELIEF FORUNFAIR COMPETITION .................................................................................................. 22VII. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 24
Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document405 Filed11/22/11 Page3 of 30

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
太郎山田 liked this

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)//-->