PUBLIC VERSION
`
`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, D.C.
`
`Before the Honorable Dee Lord
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN INFOTAINMENT SYSTEMS,
`COMPONENTS THEREOF, AND
`AUTOMOBILES CONTAINING THE SAME
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-1119
`
`RESPONDENTS RENESAS ELECTRONICS CORPORATION AND RENESAS
`ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.’S OPPOSITION
`TO BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS
`TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE (MTN. DKT. NO. 1119-006)
`
`Respondents Renesas Electronics Corporation and Renesas Electronics America, Inc.
`
`(collectively, “Renesas”) oppose Complainant Broadcom Corporation’s (“Broadcom”) Motion to
`
`Compel Renesas to Produce Source Code (Mtn. Dkt No. 1119-006) for the reasons set forth in
`
`more detail in the accompanying memorandum of points and authorities. Broadcom’s motion is
`
`moot because Renesas has already agreed to produce the requested source code files to the extent
`
`it has them. Moreover, Broadcom has painted an inaccurate and incomplete picture of Renesas’s
`
`source code production in an attempt to justify its hasty and unwarranted motion to compel. In
`
`fact, Renesas has produced a large volume of source code to date—approximately 13,807 files
`
`amounting to 4.7 gigabytes in size—and, as of the filing of this opposition, Renesas’s source
`
`code production is nearly complete. Renesas will have completed its code production well in
`
`advance of the depositions of Renesas witnesses, which are not scheduled to begin until the week
`
`of October 22. Accordingly, Broadcom’s motion is moot and should be denied.
`
`1
`337-TA-1119: RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL
`RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Dated: September 17, 2018
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` /s/ Daniel P. Muino
`Mark L. Whitaker
`Daniel P. Muino
`G. Brian Busey
`Lynn I. Levine
`Fahd Hussein Patel
`Mary Prendergast
`Aaron D. Rauh
`MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
`2000 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 6000
`Washington, DC 20006
`Tel: (202) 887-1500
`
`Yuka Teraguchi
`MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
`Shin-Marunouchi Building, 29th Floor
`5-1, Marunouchi 1-chome
`Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-6529
`Japan
`
`Email: RenesasITC1119@mofo.com
`
`Counsel for Respondents Renesas Electronics
`Corporation and Renesas Electronics America, Inc.
`
`2
`337-TA-1119: RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL
`RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, D.C.
`
`Before the Honorable Dee Lord
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN INFOTAINMENT SYSTEMS,
`COMPONENTS THEREOF, AND
`AUTOMOBILES CONTAINING THE SAME
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-1119
`
`MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS
`RENESAS ELECTRONICS CORPORATION AND RENESAS ELECTRONICS
`AMERICA, INC.’S OPPOSITION TO BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL
`RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE (MTN. DKT. NO. 1119-006)
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`Respondents Renesas Electronics Corporation (“REL”) and Renesas Electronics
`
`America, Inc. (“REA”) (collectively, “Renesas”) oppose Complainant Broadcom Corporation’s
`
`(“Broadcom”) Motion to Compel Renesas to Produce Source Code (Mtn. Dkt. No. 1119-006).
`
`Broadcom’s motion is moot because Renesas has already agreed to produce the requested
`
`source code files to the extent it has them. See Certain Automated Teller Machines, ATM Prods.,
`
`Components Thereof, & Prods. Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-972, Order No. 22, at 2 n.
`
`2 (June 28, 2016) (“Automated Teller Machines”) (“[A] motion to compel cannot be granted
`
`where the producing party has agreed to provide the discovery”) (Lord, J.).
`
`Moreover, Broadcom relies on an outdated recitation of Renesas’s source code
`
`production. Before Broadcom filed the motion, Renesas repeatedly informed Broadcom that it
`
`was making substantial progress on its source code production. In fact, in the six days between
`
`Broadcom’s last inspection of Renesas’s code on August 31 and the filing of the motion on
`1
`337-TA-1119: MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO
`BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`September 6, Renesas produced approximately 1,311 source code files. In the additional ten
`
`days since, Renesas has produced more source code. Renesas invited Broadcom to inspect the
`
`source code during the meet and confer on September 7 and again on September 12, but
`
`Broadcom declined the opportunity to inspect it for over two weeks. As of the date of this
`
`opposition, Broadcom’s motion is moot, because Renesas has now produced most of the
`
`requested code in its possession and anticipates producing the majority of the remaining code by
`
`September 21.
`
`Complainants’ motion seeks production of four categories of source code for the
`
`identified Renesas System-on-Chips (“SoCs”): (1) source code for high-level graphics and video
`
`display applications for infotainment systems; (2) firmware code; (3) hardware register transfer
`
`language (“RTL”) code; and (4) hardware C-language code which can be compiled into
`
`hardware RTL code. For the first category, Renesas does not have any responsive code in its
`
`possession, custody, or control, as Renesas is a supplier of SoCs and is not in the business of
`
`selling graphics and video display applications. For the second category, Renesas has now
`
`completed its production of firmware code provided to customers for each of the SoCs disclosed
`
`in Renesas’s interrogatory responses, except for certain third-party code, most of which Renesas
`
`expects to produce by September 21. Firmware associated with other SoCs in the same product
`
`categories as the identified SoCs is being collected and will be produced shortly. For the third
`
`category, Renesas has completed its production of hardware RTL code for the identified SoCs,
`
`except for certain third-party code, most of which Renesas expects to produce by September 21.
`
`For the fourth category, Renesas
`
`has already produced.
`
` of which Renesas
`
`2
`337-TA-1119: MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO
`BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Although Broadcom contends that Renesas’s source code production has interfered with
`
`the upcoming depositions of Renesas witnesses scheduled to begin the week of October 22, its
`
`argument is without merit as Renesas’s production schedule will give Broadcom at least a month
`
`to prepare for the depositions. Because Renesas has agreed to produce and has substantially
`
`produced the requested source code files, Broadcom’s motion should be denied as moot.
`
`II.
`
`Background on Renesas System-on-Chips
`
`Renesas offers a lineup of system-on-chips (“SoCs”) for automotive infotainment
`
`systems. In response to Broadcom’s interrogatories, Renesas identified 19 SoCs that have been
`
`imported into the United States, sold for importation into the United States, and/or otherwise sold
`
`for importation into the United States by or on behalf of REA.1 (Exh. A, 2018-07-03 Renesas’s
`
`Objections and Responses to Broadcom’s First Set of Interrogatories.) Renesas has since learned
`
`that Toyota vehicles with
`
`infotainment systems incorporate one additional Renesas
`
`SoC. Together, these 20 SoCs fall into the following product categories:
`
` R-Car Family – R-Car E1, E2, E3, H2, M2N, M2W, and M3N;
`
` SH-Navi Family – SH-NAVI J2;
`
` SH-MOBILE Family – SH-MOBILE R2 and R2R;
`
` R-MOBILE Family – R-Mobile A1; and
`
` GEN2MID Family – GEN2MID.
`
`Renesas writes the hardware code for operating these SoCs. (Exh. B at ¶10, H. Murata
`
`Decl. ISO Renesas’s Opposition to Broadcom’s Motion to Compel Renesas to Produce Source
`
`1 REL does not import into the United States, sell for importation into the United States, or
`otherwise sell in the United States Renesas SoCs used in automotive infotainment systems. REA
`imports a number of Renesas SoCs directly into the United States and/or sells them in the United
`States.
`
`3
`337-TA-1119: MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO
`BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Code (“Murata Decl.”).) For most of this hardware code, contrary to Broadcom’s mistaken
`
`assumption
`
`. (Murata Decl., ¶11.)
`
`. (Murata
`
`Decl., ¶12.) Thus, contrary to Broadcom’s characterization,
`
`Renesas also writes the original firmware code, such as the driver code, which allows the
`
`SoCs to interface with other components in the infotainment systems. (Murata Decl., ¶7.)
`
` the infotainment system makers to modify the original firmware code as
`
`they see fit. (Murata Decl., ¶8.) Thus, infotainment system makers have the option to use the
`
`original firmware code provided by Renesas, modify it, or not use it. Renesas does not know
`
`whether the infotainment systems actually use Renesas’s original firmware code, use a modified
`
`version (in which case Renesas does not know what changes are made), or not use it at all. (Id.)
`
`In addition to the above-listed SoCs, REA imports starter kits for the R-Car H3 and M3.
`
`The starter kits are not used in infotainment systems, but are generally designed for professional
`
`engineers to develop applications for future Renesas SoCs. (Murata Decl., ¶3.) Although these
`
`starter kits do not fall within the scope of the investigation because the SoCs to which they relate
`
`will not be imported or sold for importation until after the evidentiary hearing in this case (April
`
`2019), Renesas has produced documents and source code relating to the two starter kits in the
`
`spirit of cooperation.
`
`4
`337-TA-1119: MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO
`BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`III.
`
`Renesas’s Source Code Production
`
`Broadcom’s motion does not paint a full or accurate picture of Renesas’s source code
`
`production. Broadcom last inspected the code on August 31, six days before filing the present
`
`motion. OExh. C, Source Code Sign-in Sheet.) Although Renesas invited Broadcom to inspect
`
`the source code on multiple occasions since the motion was filed, Broadcom waited until
`
`September 17 to inspect it. Thus, Broadcom’s motion does not accurately describe Renesas’s
`
`production at the time of filing, nor does it describe Renesas’s additional productions made in the
`
`subsequent ten days.
`
`Renesas’s initial production of source code coincided with the entry of the Source Code
`
`Addendlnn to the Protective Order. (Order No. 6.) After Broadcom complained that Renesas’s
`
`production was lacking, Renesas took immediate steps to collect not only the code that
`
`Broadcom identified, but a broader set of source code for all of its identified SoCs. The
`
`additional collection took several weeks because Broadcom requested a large amount of code.
`
`Also, Renesas was closed for the Japanese summer holidays from August 10 to 19 and had to
`
`obtain export control clearance in order to export the code from Japan to the United States. (See
`
`Exh. 5 to Broadcom’s Motion). Renesas resumed producing source code in late August, and has
`
`now substantially completed its production. As of the filing of this opposition, Renesas has
`
`produced approximately 13,807 source code files, amounting to 4.7 gigabytes of data. Renesas
`
`expects to produce most of the remaining third—party source code, estimated to be less than 1,000
`
`files, by September 21.
`
`The table below describes the status of Renesas’s current source code production:
`
`Production Date
`
`Source Code Cate 1 0
`
`(3) Certain hardware RTL code.
`
`July 23, 2018
`
`o R-Car E2, E3, H2, H3, MZN,
`
`337—TA-l l 19: NIEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO
`
`BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`5
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`M2W, M3, M3N
` R-Mobile A1
` SH-Mobile R2, R2R
` R-Car E2, E3, H2, H3, M2N,
`M2W, M3, M3N
`
`July 30, 2018
`
`August 28, 2018
`
` SH-Navi J2
`
`August 30, 2018
`
` R-Car H2, H3
`
`August 31, 2018
`
` R-Car E2, M2N, M2W
`
`September 5, 2018
`
`September 5, 2018
`
`September 6, 2018
`September 7, 2018
`
`September 7, 2018
`
`September 9, 2018
`
`September 10, 2018
`
`September 10, 2018
`September 11, 2018
`
`September 14, 2018
`
`September 14, 2018
`
`September 14, 2018
`
` R-Car E3, M3, M3N
` GEN2MID
` R-Car E1, E2, E3, H2, H3,
`M2, M2N, M3, M3N
` R-Mobile A1
` SH-Mobile R2
` R-Car E2, M2N
` R-Car E1
`
` R-Car E2, H2, M2, M2N
` SH-Mobile R2
` SH-Mobile R2R
`
` R-Mobile A1
` SH-Mobile R2
` R-Car M2N
` R-Car E1
` R-Mobile A1
` R-Car E2, E3, H3, M2N, M3,
`M3N
` R-Mobile A1
` R-Car E1, E2, E3, H2, H3,
`M2, M2N, M3, M3N, M3W
` R-Mobile A1
` SH-Mobile R2R
` GEN2MID
` R-Car E1, E2, E3, H2, H3,
`M2N, M2W, M3, M3N
` R-Mobile A1
` SH-Mobile R2R
`
`(3) Certain hardware RTL code;
`(4) C programming code for
`
`(3) All hardware RTL code,
`except for third-party code.
`(3) All hardware RTL code,
`except for third-party code.
`(3) All hardware RTL code,
`except for third-party code.
`(3) All hardware RTL code,
`except for third-party code.
`(2) Firmware code.
`
`(2) Firmware code.
`(3) All hardware RTL code,
`except for third-party code.
`(2) Firmware code.
`
`(3) All hardware RTL code,
`except for third-party code.
`(3) All hardware RTL code,
`except for third-party code.
`(2) Firmware code.
`(2) Firmware code.
`
`(2) Firmware code.
`
`(3) Third-party hardware RTL
`code.
`
`(4) All C programming code.
`
`6
`337-TA-1119: MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO
`BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`IV.
`
`Argument
`
`Broadcom’s motion should be denied because Renesas has agreed to produce the
`
`requested source code files. Additionally, the motion should be denied because Renesas has
`
`confirmed that it has no code in its possession, custody, or control falling in category (1); has
`
`completed production of code falling into categories (2) and (3), except for certain third-party
`
`code; and has completed production of code falling into category (4).
`
`A. Renesas has agreed to produce the requested source code in its
`possession, custody, or control.
`
`Broadcom’s motion is unwarranted and should be denied because Renesas has agreed to
`
`produce the source code files that Broadcom requested. See Automated Teller Machines, Inv.
`
`No. 337-TA-972, Order No. 22, at 2 (denying motion to compel production of firmware as moot
`
`because producing party “has agreed to search for and produce versions of this firmware”).) In
`
`fact, Renesas has gone above and beyond its discovery obligations by collecting and producing a
`
`broader set of source code for its SoCs than required.
`
`B. Renesas does not have high-level application source code (category 1)
`in its possession, custody, or control.
`
`Broadcom’s motion seeks production of high-level graphics and video display
`
`applications, but Renesas does not have this code. (Murata Decl., ¶6.) Renesas is a supplier of
`
`SoCs to infotainment system makers. Renesas does not supply the applications for infotainment
`
`systems that are “written generically so that it may be implemented on chips developed by
`
`others.” (Broadcom’s Motion at 5). Such applications are typically written by the infotainment
`
`system makers themselves. If Broadcom wants this code, it needs to seek it from the
`
`infotainment system makers.
`
`7
`337-TA-1119: MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO
`BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`C. Renesas has produced substantially all relevant firmware code
`(category (2)).
`
`Broadcom’s allegation that Renesas has “not produced any firmware” code (Broadcom’s
`
`Motion at 8) is untrue. Although the firmware code was not yet available when Broadcom last
`
`inspected the source code computers on August 31, Renesas had produced some firmware code
`
`for the majority of the 20 identified SoCs at the time the motion was filed. And, Renesas’s
`
`production of firmware code associated with the 20 SoCs is now complete, except for some
`
`firmware code containing third-party confidential information, most of which Renesas expects to
`
`produce by September 21. (See Murata Decl., ¶9.) To the extent that Renesas has other relevant
`
`firmware packages for SoCs that fall into the same categories as the 20 SoCs, Renesas is
`
`collecting that firmware and expects to produce it as well.
`
`In addition, Broadcom’s request for firmware code is overly burdensome and has little
`
`relevance to the issues in the investigation. As discussed in Section II, infotainment system
`
`makers may use the original firmware code provided by Renesas, modify it for their infotainment
`
`systems, or may not use it at all in their infotainment systems. (Murata Decl., ¶8.) Therefore,
`
`Renesas does not know whether its original firmware code is used in its customers’ infotainment
`
`systems and what changes, if any, are made to the code. (Id.) If Broadcom wants to analyze the
`
`firmware code that is actually used on the infotainment systems, it should seek it from the
`
`infotainment system makers instead.
`
`D. Renesas has produced substantially complete sets of hardware RTL
`code (category 3).
`
`At the time of Broadcom’s motion, as detailed in counsel’s September 5 email (Exh. 11
`
`to Broadcom’s Motion), Renesas had already produced a complete set of hardware RTL code for
`
`10 out of 14 SoC categories (encompassing 16 identified SoCs), excluding portions containing
`8
`337-TA-1119: MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO
`BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`third-party information. Renesas has since produced the hardware RTL code for the remaining
`
`SoC categories, and has produced all RTL code except for certain code containing third-party
`
`confidential information. Renesas expects to produce most of the remaining third-party code by
`
`September 21. (See Murata Decl., ¶14.)
`
`E. Renesas has produced the hardware C code files (category 4) to the
`extent they exist.
`
`Broadcom’s last request relates to the human-programmed hardware code written in the
`
`C programming language. Broadcom erroneously assumes that Renesas
`
` But, as explained in section II
`
`above, for most Renesas SoC functional modules, Renesas engineers
`
`RTL.
`
`. For the hardware C code that does
`
`exist, Renesas already produced it. (Murata Decl., ¶13.) Thus, Renesas has no additional
`
`hardware C code files to produce.
`
`Furthermore, the hardware C code is duplicative of the hardware RTL code, because the
`
`code sets operate in exactly the same way. Thus, Broadcom’s request for such hardware C code
`
`is unduly burdensome.2 Nevertheless, Renesas has diligently searched for and produced all
`
`hardware C code that it could find.
`
`F. Renesas’s source code production is timely.
`
`Broadcom contends that Renesas’s production of source code has interfered with the
`
`upcoming depositions of Renesas witnesses in Japan. This is incorrect. Certain other
`
`2 Renesas objected to Broadcom’s Request for Production No. 20, requesting “[a]ll . . . source
`code” as “overly broad, unduly burdensome, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of
`admissible evidence, not proportional to the needs of the case, and the burden outweighs its
`likely benefit . . . .” (Exh. D, 2018-07-03 Renesas’s Objections and Responses to Broadcom’s
`Second Set of Requests for Production (Nos. 16-102), at 11.)
`9
`337-TA-1119: MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO
`BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Respondents’ depositions (such as Japan Radio Co., Ltd.) are scheduled to commence the week
`
`of October 15, but the depositions of Renesas’s witnesses will not commence until the week of
`
`October 22. Also, due to the number of technical witnesses, Renesas depositions will likely
`
`extend beyond that week. Because Renesas has substantially completed its source code
`
`production at least a month in advance of Renesas’s depositions, Broadcom’s claims are without
`
`merit. Broadcom has ample time to review Renesas’s source code in preparation for the
`
`depositions.
`
`V.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Broadcom’s Motion to Compel Renesas to Produce Source Code is unwarranted because
`
`Renesas has agreed all along to provide the requested code, and is now moot in view of
`
`Renesas’s substantial completion of its code production. For these reasons, Broadcom’s motion
`
`should be denied.
`
`10
`337-TA-1119: MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO
`BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Dated: September 17, 2018
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` /s/ Daniel P. Muino
`Mark L. Whitaker
`Daniel P. Muino
`G. Brian Busey
`Lynn I. Levine
`Fahd Hussein Patel
`Mary Prendergast
`Aaron D. Rauh
`MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
`2000 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 6000
`Washington, DC 20006
`Tel: (202) 887-1500
`
`Yuka Teraguchi
`MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
`Shin-Marunouchi Building, 29th Floor
`5-1, Marunouchi 1-chome
`Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-6529
`Japan
`
`Email: RenesasITC1119@mofo.com
`
`Counsel for Respondents Renesas Electronics
`Corporation and Renesas Electronics America, Inc.
`
`11
`337-TA-1119: MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF RENESAS’S OPPOSITION TO
`BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE SOURCE CODE
`dc-988842
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-1119
`
`EXHIBIT INDEX TO RESPONDENTS RENESAS ELECTRONICS
`CORPORATION AND RENESAS ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.’S
`OPPOSITION TO BROADCOM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO
`PRODUCE SOURCE CODE (Mtn. Dkt. No. 1119-006)
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`Designation
`
`Exhibit A
`
`Exhibit B
`
`Exhibit C
`
`Exhibit D
`
`Renesas Respondents’ Objections And Responses To
`Complainants’ First Set Of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-5), dated
`July 3, 2018
`
`Declaration Of Hiroshi Murata In Support Of Respondents
`Renesas Electronics Corporation And Renesas Electronics
`America, Inc.’S Opposition To Broadcom’s Motion To
`Compel Renesas To Produce Source Code (Mtn. Dkt. No.
`1119-006), dated September 17, 2018
`
`Renesas Source Code Sign-In Sheet
`
`Renesas Respondents’ Objections And Responses To
`Complainants’ Second Set Of Requests For Production Of
`Documents And Things (Nos. 16-102) dated July 3, 2018
`
`Public
`
`Public
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-1119
`
` EXHIBIT A TO
`RESPONDENTS RENESAS ELECTRONICS
`CORPORATION AND RENESAS ELECTRONICS
`AMERICA, INC.’S OPPOSITION TO BROADCOM’S
`MOTION TO COMPEL RENESAS TO PRODUCE
`SOURCE CODE (Mtn. Dkt. No. 1119-006)
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, D.C.
`
`Before the Honorable Dee Lord
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN INFOTAINMENT SYSTEMS,
`COMPONENTS THEREOF, AND
`AUTOMOBILES CONTAINING THE SAME
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-1119
`
`RENESAS RESPONDENTS’ OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO
`COMPLAINANTS’ FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 1-5)
`
`Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. §§ 210.27 and 210.29, and the Ground Rules in this Investigation,
`
`Respondents Renesas Electronics Corporation (“REL”) and Renesas Electronics America Inc.
`
`(“REA”) (collectively, “Renesas”) hereby submit their consolidated objections and responses
`
`(“Objections and Responses”) to Complainant Broadcom Corporation’s (“Broadcom”) First Set
`
`of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-5) (“Interrogatories”) dated June 13, 2018, served in the above-
`
`captioned Investigation of the United States International Trade Commission (“ITC”).
`
`GENERAL OBJECTIONS
`
`1.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that Broadcom purports to
`
`enlarge Renesas’s obligations beyond those imposed by the ITC Rules of Practice and Procedure
`
`(“ITC Rules”), 19 CFR § 210 et seq. and the Ground Rules issued on June 11, 2018 (Order
`
`No. 2, by Administrative Law Judge Lord (“Ground Rules”).
`
`2.
`
`Renesas responds to the Interrogatories as it interprets and understands each
`
`instruction, definition, and Interrogatory. If Broadcom subsequently asserts an interpretation of
`
`337-TA-1119: RENESAS RESPONDENTS’ OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO COMPLAINANTS’ FIRST
`SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 1-5)
`
`dc-932856
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`any instruction, definition, or Interrogatory or sub-part thereof that differs from Renesas’s
`
`understanding of that instruction, definition, or Interrogatory or sub-part thereof, Renesas
`
`reserves the right to supplement its objections and/or responses.
`
`3.
`
`Renesas does not waive the right to object to the admissibility into evidence of
`
`any documents or information provided in response to the Interrogatories. Renesas further does
`
`not waive the right to raise all questions of authenticity, relevancy, materiality, and privilege for
`
`any purpose with regard to the information provided in response to the Interrogatories, which
`
`may arise in any subsequent proceeding and/or the trial of this or any other action. Moreover,
`
`the assertion by Renesas of various general and specific objections is not a waiver of other
`
`objections that might be applicable or become so at some future time.
`
`4.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they purport to define
`
`words or phrases to have a meaning different from their commonly understood meaning or to
`
`include more than their commonly understood definitions.
`
`5.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they would require
`
`Renesas to draw a legal conclusion to make a proper response.
`
`6.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek information
`
`created in anticipation of litigation, constituting work product, protected by the attorney-client
`
`privilege, or otherwise protected from disclosure under applicable privileges, laws, or rules.
`
`Renesas’s responses to the Interrogatories should be understood to exclude such privileged and
`
`protected information. Any inadvertent disclosure of such information shall not be deemed a
`
`waiver of the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, common interest doctrine, joint
`
`337-TA-1119: RENESAS RESPONDENTS’ OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO COMPLAINANTS’ FIRST
`SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 1-5)
`
`dc-932856
`
`2
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`defense privilege, or any other applicable privilege, doctrine, or immunity recognized by statute,
`
`rule, or case law.
`
`7.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek confidential or
`
`proprietary information pertaining to Renesas’s business, trade secrets, and/or economic
`
`relationships, or to the extent that they seek confidential or proprietary information that would
`
`impinge on the constitutionally protected right to privacy of individuals.
`
`8.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek confidential,
`
`proprietary, or trade secret information of third parties. Renesas will endeavor to work with third
`
`parties in order to obtain their consent, if necessary, before identifying or disclosing such
`
`information.
`
`9.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek information that
`
`Renesas is under an obligation to a third party or court order not to disclose. Renesas will
`
`disclose such responsive, relevant, non-privileged information in accordance with the Protective
`
`Order in this Investigation, issued on June 11, 2018 (Order No. 1), and any amendments thereto,
`
`and after complying with Renesas’s obligations to the third party and/or court.
`
`10.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they purport to require
`
`Renesas to take any action that is inconsistent with or contrary to any applicable foreign privacy
`
`laws including, without limitation, any applicable Japanese and United States data privacy laws.
`
`11.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they are overly broad,
`
`unduly burdensome, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence,
`
`not proportional to the needs of the case, and/or the burden outweighs the likely benefit.
`
`337-TA-1119: RENESAS RESPONDENTS’ OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO COMPLAINANTS’ FIRST
`SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 1-5)
`
`dc-932856
`
`3
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`12.
`
`Renesas objects to each Interrogatory to the extent that it is cumulative of another
`
`Interrogatory.
`
`13.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they require Renesas to
`
`provide information of a kind or in a format that would be unduly burdensome to provide.
`
`14.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek information that
`
`is not in the possession, custody, or control of Renesas, to the extent that the Interrogatories
`
`purport to require Renesas to speculate about the identity of persons who might have responsive
`
`information, and to the extent that they purport to call for any accounting of documents or things
`
`that Renesas no longer possesses and/or was under no obligation to maintain.
`
`15.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they require the disclosure
`
`of information that is not in Renesas’s possession, custody, or control or impose any other
`
`obligations on Renesas beyond the scope of the ITC Rules or the Ground Rules. Consistent with
`
`its obligations under the ITC Rules and the Ground Rules, Renesas will conduct a reasonable
`
`inquiry to respond to the Interrogatories.
`
`16.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek information that
`
`is publicly available, already in Broadcom’s possession, custody, or control, is equally or more
`
`readily available from sources other than Renesas, that Broadcom can obtain from other sources
`
`that are more convenient and/or less burdensome.
`
`17.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they are not specifically
`
`limited to any time period relevant to any claim or defense in this Investigation, and thereby seek
`
`information that is not relevant to any claim or defense in this Investigation, not reasonably
`
`337-TA-1119: RENESAS RESPONDENTS’ OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO COMPLAINANTS’ FIRST
`SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 1-5)
`
`dc-932856
`
`4
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, not proportional to the needs of the case,
`
`and the burden outweighs the likely benefit.
`
`18.
`
`Renesas objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they are premature and request
`
`that Renesas set forth its contentions, respond to a question of law, or require an expert opinion.
`
`Renesas’s investigation is ongoing and Renesas will disclose its contentions pursuant to the case
`
`schedule, the schedule agreed upon or to be negotiated by the parties, and/or the parties’ agreed
`
`upon or to be negotiated Discovery Stipulation in this Investigation.
`
`19.
`
`Any information provided herein is not, and shall not be deemed, an admission of
`
`any factual or legal contention contained in the Interrogatories. Renesas objects to the
`
`Interrogatories to the extent that they contain any factual or legal misrepresentations.
`
`20.
`
`Renesas objects to Broadcom’s definition of “accused products” as overly broad,
`
`unduly burdensome, vague, and not relevant to any claim or defense in this Investigation to the
`
`extent that Interrogatories incorporating this definition seek information not limited to any
`
`reasonable time period, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible
`
`evidence, not proportional to the needs of the case, and the burden outweighs the likely benefit.
`
`Renesas further objects to Broadcom’s definition of “accused products” on the ground and to the
`
`extent that Interrogatories incorporating this definition asks for information relating to products
`
`which are not imported or are no longer imported by Renesas into the United States, sold for
`
`importation by Renesas into the United States, or sold within the United States after importation
`
`by Renesas. Renesas further objects to Broadcom’s definition of “accused products” on the
`
`ground and to the extent that Interrogatories incorporating this definition asks for information
`
`relating to accused products that will not be imported by Renesas in the United States, sold for
`
`337-TA-1119: RENESAS RESPONDENTS’ OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO COMPLAINANTS’ FIRST
`SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 1-5)
`
`dc-932856
`
`5
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`importation by Renesas into the United States, or sold within the United States after importation
`
`by Renesas prior to the close of the evidentiary record in this Investigation. Renesas reasonably
`
`clarifies “accused products” to mean: (1) automotive infotainment systems (head units, rear seat
`
`entertainment units, and units for displaying information or entertainment); (2) System-on Chips
`
`(SoCs) used in such automotive infotainment