Free Letter - District Court of California - California

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA

Document 110

Filed 11/16/2007

Page 1 of 4

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA

Document 110

Filed 11/16/2007

Page 2 of 4

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA

Document 110

Filed 11/16/2007

Page 3 of 4

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA

Document 110

Filed 11/16/2007

Page 4 of 4

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA

Document 110-2

Filed 11/16/2007

Page 1 of 2

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA

Document 110-2

Filed 11/16/2007

Page 2 of 2

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA Document 110-3 Filed 09/23/2005 Page 1 1 of 4 Case 3:05-cv-03350-MLC-JJH Document 20 Filed 11/16/2007 Page of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

: Civil Action No. 05-3350 (MLC) : Plaintiff, : : v. : PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER : QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, : : Defendant. : _________________________________________ :

BROADCOM CORPORATION,

This matter having come before the Court during an initial scheduling conference, conducted on September 22, 2005, pursuant to FED . R. CIV . P. 16, and the Court having considered the positions of the Parties; and good cause having been shown; IT IS on this 22nd day of September 2005, ORDERED THAT: 1. The Parties will complete fact discovery in this case on or before December 31, 2006. No discovery will issue beyond that date, except upon motion and for good cause shown. 2. In accordance with FED . R. CIV . P. 30, the Parties shall be limited to 30 depositions, per side (multiple day depositions by specific agreement of counsel on conference call application) except upon leave of the Court. In accordance with FED . R. CIV . P. 33, the parties will be limited to 35 interrogatories (including all subparts), per party, exception leave of the Court. 3. In accordance with FED . R. CIV . P. 26(a)(1), each party will submit a letter, not later than, October 31, 2005, to the undersigned certifying that initial disclosure has been made. This material will not be filed with the Clerk of the Court. 4. No later than October 31, 2005, each party shall designate an electronic information representative knowledgeable about the respective party's automation system. 5. Any motion to join new parties, whether by amended or third-party complaint, mu t be filed no later than October 13, 2006 and made returnable on November 6, 2006. 6. Any motion to amend the pleadings must be filed no later than October 13, 2006 and made returnable on November 6, 2006.

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA Document 110-3 Filed 09/23/2005 Page 2 2 of 4 Case 3:05-cv-03350-MLC-JJH Document 20 Filed 11/16/2007 Page of 4 7. Any discovery or case management disputes will be brought to the Magistrate Judge's attention immediately by conference call with local counsel, with letter preceding the conference call. L. CIV . R. 37.1(a)(1); see also L. CIV . R. 16.1(f). 8. Any dispositive motions shall be addressed during the status conference conducted on February 22, 2006. 9. Counsel will confer in an attempt to resolve any discovery or case management disputes before making such dispute the subject of a motion. No discovery motion will be entertained absent counsel's full compliance with L. CIV . R. 37.1(a)(1); see also L. CIV . R. 16.1(f). 10. Plaintiff's and Defendant's expert reports shall be addressed during the status conference conducted on February 22, 2006. 11. A status conference will be held before the undersigned, at the Clarkson S. Fisher United States Courthouse, Trenton, New Jersey on February 22, 2006 at 11:00 A.M., to discuss experts, settlement, and dispositive motion practice. 12. The final pretrial conference shall be addressed during the status conference on February 11, 2006. 13. The Parties shall arrange a 26(f) type meeting with counsel and their representatives after initial written discovery has been propounded. A written report shall be submitted to the Court no later than November 30, 2005. 14. The attorneys for all parties are further directed to meet together by agreement, initiated by counsel for the plaintiff no later than ten (10) days before the date of the pretrial conference to: a. discuss settlement; b. stipulate to as many facts and issues as possible; c. prepare a Final Pretrial Order in the form and content as required by the Court. Plaintiff's counsel will prepare the Final Pretrial Order and will submit it to all other counsel for approval and execution. The original and one copy of the executed Final Pretrial Order will be delivered to the pretrial conference. All counsel are responsible for the timely submission of the Final Pretrial Stipulation and Order; d. examine all exhibits and documents proposed to be used at trial; e. complete all other matters which may expedite both the pretrial and trial of the case; f. original and one copy of the proposed Final Pretrial Order is to be submitted five (5) days

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA Document 110-3 Filed 09/23/2005 Page 3 3 of 4 Case 3:05-cv-03350-MLC-JJH Document 20 Filed 11/16/2007 Page of 4 in advance of the conference. 15. Appropriately colored markers (obtained from the Clerk's Office) will be affixed to the exhibits at or prior to the time they are shown to opposing counsel at the meeting of counsel referred to above, and each marker will bear the number of the exhibit to which it is affixed. 16. At the pretrial conference counsel should be prepared to discuss settlement of the case. Clients must be made available by telephone. 17. The Court may, from time to time, schedule conferences as may be required, either on its own motion or at the request of counsel. 18. Since all dates set forth herein are established with the assistance and knowledge of counsel, there will be no extensions except for good cause shown and by leave of Court, even with consent of all counsel. 19. Failure to appear at subsequent conferences, or to comply with any of the terms of this Order, may result in sanctions. 20. Any proposed confidentiality order agreed to by the parties must be accompanied by a separate statement showing specific good cause for the entry of the order. See Pansy v. Borough of Stroudsburg, 23 F.3d 772 (3d Cir. 1994); Glenmede Trust Company v. Thompson, 56 F.3d 476 (1995); FED R. CIV . P. 26(c). 21. Counsel are advised that the Court has various audio/visual and evidence presentation equipment available for use at trial at no cost to the Bar. This equipment includes an evidence presentation system, which consists of a document camera, digital projector, and screen. The projector may be used to display images which originate from a variety of sources, including television, VCR, and personal computer. The document camera may be used to display documents, photographs, charts, transparencies and small objects. For further information, please contact the Courtroom Deputy Clerk, Denis Glynn at 609-989-2144. 22. Counsel are invited to use the George H. Barlow Attorney Conference Room located on the third floor of the Courthouse Annex. The room is equipped with telephones, laptop access/printer, copier, and fax. /s/ John J. Hughes JOHN J. HUGHES United States Magistrate Judge ALL PROPOSED ORDERS AND LETTER MEMORANDA SENT TO CHAMBERS SHOULD BE IN WORDPERFECT FORMAT AND E-MAILED TO: [email protected]. ANY FILINGS WITH THE CLERK'S OFFICE SHOULD BE IN PDF FORMAT.

CaseCase 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA Document 110-3 09/23/2005 Page 4 of 4 4 of 4 3:05-cv-03350-MLC-JJH Document 20 Filed Filed 11/16/2007 Page

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA

Document 110-4

Filed 11/16/2007

Page 1 of 2

THOMAS R. BROME ROBERT D. J O F F E ALLEN FINKELSON RONALD S. ROLFE PAUL C. SAUNDERS DOUGL4S D. BROADWATER ALAN C. STEPHENSON MAX R. SHULMAN STUART W GOLD . J O H N W WHITE . J O H N E. BEERBOWER EVAN R. CHESLER PATRICIA GEOGHEGAN D. COLLIER KIRKHAM MICHAEL L. SCHLER KRlS F. HEINZELMAN 8. ROEBINS KlESSLlNG ROGER D. TURNER PHILIP A. GELSTON RORY 0. MILLSON NEIL P. WESTREICH FRANCIS P. BARRON RICHARD W CLARY . WILLIAM P. ROGERS, JR. JAMES D. COOPER

STEPHEN L. GORDON DANIEL L. MOSLEY GREGORY M. SHAW PETER 9. WILSON JAMES C. VARDELL. ROBERT H. BARON KEVIN J. GREHAN STEPHEN 5. MADSEN C. ALLEN PARKER MARC S. ROSENBERG WILLIAM B. ERANNAN SUSAN WEBSTER TIMOTHY G. MASSAD DAVID MERCADO ROWAN D. WILSON JOHN T. GAFFNEY PETER T. BARBUR SANDRA C. GOLDSTEIN PAUL MICHALSKI THOMAS G. RAFFERTY MICHAEL S. GOLDMAN RICHARD HALL ELIZABETH L. GRAYER JULIE A. NORTH ANDREW W. NEEDHAM

8 2 5 EIGHTH AVENUE NEWYORK, NY 10019-7475
TELEPHONE: ( 2 1 2 ) 4 7 4 - 1000 FACSIMILE: (212) 4 7 4 - 7 7 0 0

m

CITYPOINT ONE ROPEMAKER STREET LDNDON EC2Y 9HR TELEPHONE: 44.10-7453-1000 FACSIMILE: 44.20-7860-1 1 5 0

(2 12) 474- 1956

STEPHEN L. BURNS KATHERINE 8 . FORREST KEITH R. HUMMEL DANIEL SLlFKlN JEFFREY A. SMITH ROBERT I. TOWNSEND, WILLIAM J. WHELAN, SCOTT A. BARSHAY PHILIP J. BOECKMAN ROGER G. BROOKS WILLIAM V. FOGG FAlZA J. SAEED RICHARD J. STARK THOMAS E. DUNN J U L I E SPELLMAN SWEET RONALD CAM1 MARK I. GREENE SARKIS JEBEJIAN JAMES C. WOOLERY DAVID R. MARRIOTT MICHAEL A. PASKIN ANDREW J. PlTTS MICHAEL T. REYNOLDS ANTONY L. RYAN GEORGE E. ZOBITZ

m

m

GEORGE A. STEPHANAKIS DARlN P. MCATEE GARY A. BORNSTEIN TIMOTHY G. CAMERON KARIN A. D r M A S l LIZABETHANN R. EISEN DAVID 5. FINKELSTEIN DAVID GREENWALD R4CHEL G. SKAISTIS PAUL H. ZUMBRO JOEL F. HEROLD ERIC W. HILFERS GEORGE F. SCHOEN ERIK R. TAVLEL

SPECIAL COUNSEL SAMUEL C. BUTLER GEORGE J. GILLESPIE, THOMAS D. BARR

m

O F COUNSEL ROBERT ROSENMAN CHRISTINE BESHAR

June 14,2006 Broadcom Corporation v. OUALCOMM Incorporated Dear Steve:
I write in response to your letter of June 9 regarding the sharing of documents produced in this case with counsel in the trade secret case.

We reject the mischaracterization of "Qualcomm's apparent position" "noted" in your letter. Broadcom's counsel in the trade secret case has access to the documents identified in your June 1,2006 letter. None of those documents is a Broadcom proprietary document. Rather, each is a QUALCOMM document. If ~roadcom any genuine concerns about any of those QUALCOMM documents and has can in fact identify any Broadcom information in those documents that is confidential and that was not lawfully obtained by QUALCOMM, Broadcom may raise those concerns with QUALCOMM's counsel in the trade secret case. With respect to document sharing, we do not believe that a party should have the unilateral right to share any document from this case it chooses. If you wish to share any of QUALCOMM's documents produced in this case with outside counsel in 06-cv-0660, please identify those documents to us and we will not unreasonably withhold consent. We will likewise identify any documents we wish to share with outside counsel in 06-cv-0660 to you, and will expect that Broadcom will also not unreasonably withhold consent. As we told you on May 3 1,2006, we seek to share documents bearing production numbers BCMHYD 1841894-898, BCMLEE046 1 118- 120,

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA

Document 110-4

Filed 11/16/2007

Page 2 of 2

BCMLEE0461779-780, BCMLEE046 1784-791 and BCMLEE1924149-156 with ou.tside counsel in 06-cv-0660. Please let us know if Broadcorn consents. Very truly yours,

Steven J. Kaiser, Esq. Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP 2000 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. Washington, DC 20006

BY FAX
Copy to: David S. Stone, Esq. Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP 150 John F. Kennedy Parkway Short Hills, NJ 07078
BY FAX
.

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA

Document 110-5

Filed 11/16/2007

Page 1 of 2

2000 P E N N S Y L V A N I A A V E N U E . N W WASHINGTON, 0 C 20006-1 801 (202) 974-1 500
FACSIMILE (2021874- BBB 1
WWW CLEARYGOlTLlEB

COM
FRANKFURT COLOGNE ROME MILAN

N E W YORK PARIS BRUSSELS LONDON MOSCOW

KENNETH L BACHMAN. JR. SARA 0 SCHOTLAND JOHN S MAGNEV MARK LEDDY JOHN C MURPHV. JR DAVID Y BECKER GEORGE S CARV JANET L WELLER MITCHELL S DUPLER LINDA J S D L W JOHN T BYAM MATTHEW 0 $LATER MICHAEL R LAZERWITZ DAVlO 1 GELFAND MICHAEL A MAZZUCHI R 0 8 E R T W COOK MARK W NELSON ROBIN M BERGEN DEREK M B U S H P A U L D MAROUARDT BRIAN BVRNE 1m510EHT C.ITWCIS
J

J o y c e e MCCARTV KAREN A. KERR SCOTT R GOODWIN SEN1011 ATTOINEIJ MATTHEW R AVRES MATTHEW I OACHRACK JENNIPCR 6 BENSON L E O C SERGER MATTHEW J BERMAN PATRICK R BOCK L e A n BRANNON JOANNE C OYARS JEREMTCALSYN KATHERINE M CARROLL KERRI J CHASE SHAWN J C H E N FARAH F COOK SEAN 0 COREV ALYSDN J DAtS LARRY C OEMBOWSKI CARL EDMAN ALINA D ELDRED DESMOHO EPPEL N I C W S 5 ERICSSON ZRIII F GERDING CHmISTOPHER D HhL8. STEPHANIE HALLOUBT MORGAN A HARRIS MICHAEL R HAPTMAN* ELIZLIBCTH A HARVEY. ERIC H HILDEII~RAND MEGHAN A IRMLER

HONG KONG BElJlNG

LUGSNEYARANS D A N l d L B SILVER RICHARD DLC H l N D S SEMIOI COUNSEL

W RICHARD BIDSTRUP SCOTT N BENEDICT KEVIN A GRIFFIN STEVEN J KAlSER COUMBEL

MEETU K A U L DINAH R KNIGHT BRENT L I T T I N JCPrREY LEASURE SARAH E LSWIS JOHN R LOATMAN PATRICIA M HCDERMOTT AMY E YCFARLANE JOHN P YCGlLL. JR YASMIN MEHRAIN. JENNIFER A NEVER* ADAM J MILLER JANET P MORRIS JENNIFER A MORRISSEY ANNENEWTON JONATHAN L H N I G R K N CHINWE OKASI NICHOLAS R OLMSTED PAULPASTERNAK HELEN U P A T l K l SUZANNE B PERRY AUDRA L SAVAGE. TAMARA 0 ECHMIDT OMAR SCRAGELOIN GARY SILBER SARA STAINBACK JOSHUA B (ITERLINO P A U L R ST LAWRENCE III SARAH G TEN SIETHOFF PETIA VRETENAROVA DANA D C WCSTFACL MARK J WOOOWARD
ASSOCIATES

ADMITTED ONLY TO A BAR OTHCR THAN THAT O F T H E DlSTRlCT O F COLUMBIA WORKING LNOER 1 H P SUPCRVISION O F PRILCICALS O F THC WASHINGTON OVVICC

W n t d s Direct hal' (202)974-1 554 E-Mail. [email protected]

June 27,2006 Fabian D. Gonell, Esq. Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP 825 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10019-7475 Re: Broadcorn Cornoration v. Oualcomm Incoworated Dear Fabian: This letter summarizes our recent discussions regarding the outstanding party discovery issues in this case. Interrogatories. The parties have agreed that Qualcomm will serve its objections and responses to Broadcorn's first set of interrogatories by July 28,2006 and that Broadcorn likewise will provide its supplemental response to Qualcomm's Interrogatory 11 by that date. Documents. The parties have agreed that they will complete their productions in response to each other's respective first document requests by July 28,2006, with the exception of documents that are in the queue for possible withholding in whole or in part as privileged or otherwise not subject to discovery. The parties have agreed to complete their respective productions of those documents (or portions thereof) (i.e.,those documents or portions thereof that, upon further review, are determined to be responsive but not to be privileged or otherwise not subject to production) by August 31,2006. Likewise, Broadcorn will complete its production in response to Qualcomrn's second document requests by August 31, 2006.

Case 3:08-cv-01607-JAH-JMA

Document 110-5

Filed 11/16/2007

Page 2 of 2

Rule 26(b)(5) Information. The parties have agreed to provide each other with the information required under Rule 26(b)(5) as to their respective interrogatory responses by July 28,2006. The parties have agreed to provide each other with the information required under Rule 26(b)(5) as to their respective document productions by August 3 1,2006. Qualcornm's Document Reuuest 64. Broadcom has agreed to produce the documents in this case that it is gathering and producing in 06cv0660 (the "California Action") in response to the specific request that is parallel to Qualcomm's Request 64, at or shortly after the time they are produced in the California Action. Qualcomm has agreed to do likewise should Broadcom serve parallel document requests in this case and in the California Action. Dwositions. The parties have agreed that party depositions in this case will take place primarily in the fall (i.e.,on or after September 18). The parties have agreed to work together over the summer to arrange a mutually acceptable schedule for such depositions. Please let me know if you think I have misstated anything. Very truly yours,

Stev cc: Richard Stark, Esq.

aiser 9
J