UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, D.C.
`
`Before the Honorable
`Administrative Law Judge MaryJoan McNamara
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN LTE- AND 3G-COMPLIANT
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATION DEVICES
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`Investigation No.: 337-TA-1138
`
`RESPONDENTS’ RESPONSE TO INVT SPE LLC’S MOTION FOR JUDICIAL
`ENFORCEMENT OF SUBPOENA TO SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
`(MOTION DOCKET NO. 1138-010)
`
`Complainant INVT SPE LLC’s (“INVT”) motion for judicial enforcement of subpoena to
`
`
`
`
`
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung”) seeks several categories of discovery relating to
`
`technical and economic domestic industry. INVT’s motion also includes a request to supplement
`
`its expert reports with discovery obtained from Samsung. (Mot. at 3.) Respondents Apple Inc.
`
`(“Apple”), HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. (collectively “HTC”), ZTE Corporation and
`
`ZTE (USA), Inc. (collectively “ZTE”) (together, “Respondents”) do not take a position regarding
`
`the substance of any discovery disputes between INVT and Samsung. However, Respondents
`
`oppose INVT’s request to supplement expert reports (as well as any similar request to supplement
`
`domestic industry contentions) and respectfully ask that this request be denied.
`
`
`
`As an initial matter, INVT failed to inform Respondents during its Ground Rule 2.2 meet
`
`and confer that INVT’s motion would include a request to supplement expert reports. Further,
`
`INVT’s motion does not explain any basis, let alone show good cause, for its request for future
`
`supplementation. In the event that INVT seeks to introduce a specific supplement at some future
`
`
`
`
`
`
`WASHINGTON, D.C.
`
`Before the Honorable
`Administrative Law Judge MaryJoan McNamara
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN LTE- AND 3G-COMPLIANT
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATION DEVICES
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`Investigation No.: 337-TA-1138
`
`RESPONDENTS’ RESPONSE TO INVT SPE LLC’S MOTION FOR JUDICIAL
`ENFORCEMENT OF SUBPOENA TO SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
`(MOTION DOCKET NO. 1138-010)
`
`Complainant INVT SPE LLC’s (“INVT”) motion for judicial enforcement of subpoena to
`
`
`
`
`
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung”) seeks several categories of discovery relating to
`
`technical and economic domestic industry. INVT’s motion also includes a request to supplement
`
`its expert reports with discovery obtained from Samsung. (Mot. at 3.) Respondents Apple Inc.
`
`(“Apple”), HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. (collectively “HTC”), ZTE Corporation and
`
`ZTE (USA), Inc. (collectively “ZTE”) (together, “Respondents”) do not take a position regarding
`
`the substance of any discovery disputes between INVT and Samsung. However, Respondents
`
`oppose INVT’s request to supplement expert reports (as well as any similar request to supplement
`
`domestic industry contentions) and respectfully ask that this request be denied.
`
`
`
`As an initial matter, INVT failed to inform Respondents during its Ground Rule 2.2 meet
`
`and confer that INVT’s motion would include a request to supplement expert reports. Further,
`
`INVT’s motion does not explain any basis, let alone show good cause, for its request for future
`
`supplementation. In the event that INVT seeks to introduce a specific supplement at some future
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`time based upon discovery obtained from Samsung, INVT should identify the supplement at that
`
`time and seek leave under the “good cause” standard routinely applied by the Commission.
`
`
`
`Moreover, Respondents note that INVT did not exercise diligence, see G.R. 3.5.3, in
`
`pursuing the discovery from Samsung that is sought in INVT’s present motion, and INVT’s motion
`
`for judicial enforcement is therefore untimely:
`
`• On October 25, 2018, the ALJ issued INVT’s subpoena to Samsung.
`
`• On November 30, 2018, Samsung informed INVT that “none of the subpoenaed [U.S.]
`
`Samsung entities have the Build IDs” now sought in INVT’s motion and that “it may need
`
`more specificity” to endeavor to provide any technical documentation it may have. (Mot.,
`
`Ex. 5 at 1.) Samsung further told INVT “as far back as November” that technical
`
`documents “regarding standards compliance,” which are also now sought in INVT’s
`
`motion, must be obtained from Qualcomm. (Mot., Ex. 4 at 1.)
`
`•
`
`INVT identifies no further action it took before the government shutdown began on
`
`December 22, 2019.
`
`• January 4, 2019 was the deadline for INVT’s contentions regarding domestic industry.
`
`• On January 11, 2019, INVT responded to Samsung’s November 30, 2018 request for more
`
`specificity with a list of “42 requests for information relating to 23 different specification
`
`sections on 14 phones with no identification of the types of documents INVT was seeking.”
`
`(Mot., Ex. 4 at 1; Ex. 7).
`
`• On January 16, 2019, INVT requested a G.R. 2.2 meet-and-confer with Samsung (Mot.,
`
`Ex. 4 at 4).
`
`• January 25, 2019 was the deadline for burden expert reports on domestic industry.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`•
`
`INVT waited until January 31, 2019 to provide a more focused list to Samsung of technical
`
`documents sought by INVT. (Id., Ex. 10.)
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/s/ Paul F. Brinkman, P.C.
`Paul F. Brinkman, P.C.
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`655 Fifteenth Street, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20005
`Telephone: (202) 879-5000
`Facsimile: (202) 879-5200
`
`Greg S. Arovas, P.C.
`Robert A. Appleby, P.C.
`Jeanne M. Heffernan, P.C.
`Leslie M. Schmidt
`Alan Rabinowitz
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`601 Lexington Avenue
`New York, NY 10022
`Telephone: (212) 446-4800
`Facsimile: (212) 446-4900
`
`Akshay S. Deoras
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`555 California Street
`San Francisco, CA 94104
`Telephone: (415) 439-1400
`Facsimile: (415) 439-1500
`
`David Rokach
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`300 North LaSalle
`Chicago, IL 60654
`Telephone: (312) 862-2000
`Facsimile: (312) 862-2200
`
`Counsel for Respondent Apple, Inc.
`
`Dated: February 14, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Jay H. Reiziss
`Jay H. Reiziss
`Alexander P. Ott
`McDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP
`500 North Capitol Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20001
`T: 202-756-8000
`F: 202-756-8087
`
`Charles M. McMahon
`Brian A. Jones
`Thomas M. DaMario
`McDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP
`444 West Lake Street, Suite 4000
`Chicago, IL 60606
`T: 312-372-2000
`F: 312-984-7700
`
`Jiaxiao Zhang
`McDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP
`18565 Jamboree Road
`Suite 250
`Irvine, CA 92612-2565
`T: 949-851-0633
`F: 949-851-9348
`
`Attorneys for ZTE Corporation
`and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`
`
`
` /s/ Stephen S. Korniczky
` Stephen S. Korniczky
`Martin R. Bader
`Nam Kim
`Ericka J. Schulz
`Ryan P. Cunningham
`Eric K. Gill
`Ximena Solano Suarez
`SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER &
`HAMPTON LLP
`12275 El Camino Real, Suite 200
`San Diego, California 92130
`Telephone: (858) 720-8900
`Facsimile: (858) 509-3691
`Email: LegalTM-HTC-INVT-
`ITC@SheppardMullin.com
`
`Edward V. Anderson
`SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER &
`HAMPTON LLP
`379 Lytton Avenue
`Palo Alto, California 94301
`Telephone: (650) 815-2600
`Facsimile: (650) 816-2601
`
`Attorneys for Respondents
`HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, DC
`
`In the Matter of Certain LTE- and 3G-Compliant Cellular Communications Devices
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1138
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I, Robert P. Leonard, hereby certify that on February 14, 2019 true and correct copies of
`RESPONDENTS’ RESPONSE TO INVT SPE LLC’S MOTION FOR JUDICIAL
`ENFORCEMENT OF SUBPOENA TO SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. were
`filed and served upon the following parties as indicated.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Via Electronic Filing(EDIS)
`Via Hand Delivery
`Via Federal Express
`Via Electronic Mail
`Via EDIS
`Via Hand Delivery
`Via Federal Express
`Via Electronic Mail
`
`Lisa R. Barton, Secretary
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, S.W., Room 112
`Washington, DC 20436
`Hon. MaryJoan McNamara
`Administrative Law Judge
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, S.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20436
`jae.lee@usitc.gov
`Michael.Buckler@usitc.gov
`
`Reginald Lucas, Esq.
`Office of Unfair Import Investigations
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, S.W., Suite 401
`Washington, DC 20436
`reginald.lucas@usitc.gov
`
`On Behalf of Complainant INVT SPE LLC
`Bryan J. Vogel
`ROBINS & KAPLAN LLP
`199 Park Avenue, Suite 3600
`New York, NY 10022
`RK_INVT_ITC@RobinsKaplan.com
`
`On Behalf of Respondents HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc.
`
`Via EDIS
`Stephen S. Kornicky
`
`Via Hand Delivery
`Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
`
`Via Federal Express
`12275 El Camino Real, Suite 200
`
`Via Electronic Mail
`San Digeo, California 92130
`LegalTm-HTC-INVT-ITC@sheppardmullin.com
`
`
`Via EDIS
`Via Hand Delivery
`Via Federal Express
`Via Electronic Mail
`
`Via EDIS
`Via Hand Delivery
`Via Federal Express
`Via Electronic Mail
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`On Behalf of Respondents ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc.
`Jay H. Reiziss
`
`Via EDIS
`McDermott Will & Emery LLP
`
`Via Hand Delivery
`500 North Capitol Street, NW
`
`Via Federal Express
`Washington, DC 20001
`
`Via Electronic Mail
`ZTEINVT@mwe.com
`
`On Behalf of Non-Party Samsung Electronics America, Inc.
`Larry L. Shatzer
`
`Via EDIS
`Paul D. Strain
`
`Via Hand Delivery
`Stephen G. Nagy
`
`Via Federal Express
`STRAIN PLLC
`
`Via Electronic Mail
`1455 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 400
`Washington, D.C. 20004
`Tel: (202) 621-1872
`Fax: (202) 621-1873
`ITC-1138@strainpllc.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Robert P. Leonard
`Robert P. Leonard
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
