PUBLIC VERSION
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, D.C.
`
`Before the Honorable MaryJoan McNamara
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN LTE– AND 3G- COMPLIANT
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`DEVICES
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-1138
`
`
`NON-PARTY SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.’S
`RENEWED MOTION TO QUASH COMPLAINANT’S TRIAL SUBPOENA
`AD TESTIFICANDUM AND REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION
`
`Pursuant to Commission Rules 210.15(d) and 210.32(d) and Ground Rules 1.9 and 2.2,
`
`
`
`
`
`non-party Samsung Electronics America, Inc., (“SEA”) respectfully renews its motion to quash
`
`the trial subpoena ad testificandum served by Complainant INVT SPE LLC (“INVT”) in this
`
`investigation on June 21, 2019 on SEA employee Timothy Sheppard.
`
`
`
`SEA originally moved to quash the subpoena on July 1, 2019 [Motion Dkt. No. 1138-034].
`
`On July 24, 2019, the ALJ issued Order No. 43 denying SEA’s motion “in-part, without prejudice.”
`
`Specifically, Order No. 43 expressly provided: “Samsung may resurrect it Motion to Quash closer
`
`to the date of the Hearing. Accordingly, at this time Samsung’s Motion to Quash, Motion Docket
`
`No. 1138-034, is denied, at least in part, without prejudice.” Order No. 43 at 4 (emphasis original).
`
`
`
`The subpoena is limited, only seeking testimony regarding SEA’s documentation produced
`
`in this investigation and, in particular, those documents: (i) foundation and (ii) authenticity:
`
`. . . the documentation compiled for this Investigation and produced by SEA, including the
`information contained in the confidential Declaration of its employee, Mr. Timothy
`Sheppard dated December 21, 2018, and the underlying documents and financial data in
`support of said Declaration. The testimony requested by INVT is intended to address only
`the subjects mentioned above and authenticity of relevant documents produced by SEA.
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`INVT Subpoena Ad Testificandum (Decl. of Larry L. Shatzer (Ex. 1)) at Ex. A.
`
`
`
`As set forth in the attached memorandum of points and authorities, in response to prior
`
`discovery subpoenas from INVT and Respondents, SEA produced documents along with a
`
`declaration of Mr. Sheppard explaining the nature of the underlying documents. Mr. Sheppard then
`
`appeared for a videotaped deposition as SEA’s corporate witness on February 13, 2019. INVT,
`
`Respondents, and the Office of Unfair Import Investigations appeared and questioned Mr.
`
`Sheppard until all questions had been exhausted. Indeed, SEA is unaware of any party’s objection
`
`to the authenticity or foundation for any of the documentation compiled by SEA for this
`
`investigation. To the extent that there are open issues on other topics, such as licensing or INVT’s
`
`expert’s use of SEA’s documentation, neither SEA nor Mr. Sheppard have relevant knowledge to
`
`assist the Court.
`
`
`
`Further, INVT, the party requesting the trial subpoena, along with Respondents and Staff,
`
`agree INVT’s trial subpoena has become moot. See Notice of the Parties and SEA Concerning
`
`Mootness of Trial Subpoena Ad Testificandum filed August 1, 2019. Accordingly, no party has
`
`identified any need for Mr. Sheppard’s live testimony and have expressed the desire for deposition
`
`designations to be admitted into evidence in lieu of live testimony. Commission Rule 210.28(h) as
`
`well as Ground Rules 8.6.8 and 8.6.9 provide an appropriate vehicle for entering that evidence.
`
`
`
`In light of his other professional and personal commitments, requiring Mr. Sheppard to
`
`travel to Washington, DC to present cumulative and duplicative live testimony solely on the
`
`uncontested issues of foundation and authentication would unnecessarily further burden non-party
`
`SEA and Mr. Sheppard while not advancing resolution of the remaining issues in the investigation.
`
`For at least these reasons, SEA and Mr. Sheppard respectfully ask that the subpoena ad
`
`testificandum be quashed.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Request for Expedited Consideration
`
`
`
`Pursuant to Ground Rules 1.9 and 2.7, SEA requests expedited consideration of this
`
`renewed motion. Specifically, SEA requests any opposition to this renewed motion be filed no
`
`later than September 5, 2019. Expedited consideration is appropriate given only Complainant
`
`indicates it intends to oppose the motion as well as the imminent commencement of the hearing.
`
`Ground Rule 2.2 Certification
`
`
`SEA certifies it has made reasonable, good-faith efforts to resolve the subject of this motion
`
`
`
`
`with the subpoenaing party INVT and the other parties more than two business days prior to filing
`
`this motion. Specifically, counsel for SEA contacted the parties on September 27, 2019 regarding
`
`this motion. Respondents Apple, Inc., HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc. ZTE Corporation and
`
`ZTE (USA), Inc. all indicate they take no position. Likewise the Staff indicates it does not take
`
`any position. Counsel for Complaint INVT SPE LLC indicates “[g]iven that Judge McNamara
`
`denied INVT’s motion to admit INVT’s deposition designations of Mr. Sheppard and related SEA
`
`documents without a sponsoring witness, INVT opposes SEA’s Motion to Quash.”
`
`
`Dated: August 30, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Larry L. Shatzer
`Larry L. Shatzer
`Paul D. Strain
`Stephen G. Nagy
`STRAIN PLLC
`1455 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 400
`Washington, D.C. 20004
`Tel: (202) 621-1872
`Fax: (202) 621-1873
`Email: ITC-1138@strainpllc.com
`
`
`Counsel for Non-Party Samsung Electronics
`America, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`United States International Trade Commission
`Investigation No. 337-TA-1138
`In the Matter of Certain LTE- and 3G- Compliant Cellular Communications Devices
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that, on September 6, 2019, he caused the foregoing PUBLIC
`VERSION of NON-PARTY SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.’S RENEWED
`MOTION TO QUASH COMPLAINANT’S TRIAL SUBPOENA AD TESTIFICANDUM
`and SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM to be served upon the following parties as indicated
`below:
`
`The Honorable Lisa R. Barton
`Secretary to the Commission
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, S.W., Suite 112
`Washington, D.C. 20436
`
`
`The Honorable MaryJoan McNamara
`Administrative Law Judge
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, SW, Room 317
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`Jae B. Lee
`Michael L. Buckler
`Attorney Advisors
`Jae.Lee@usitc.gov
`Michael.Buckler@usitc.gov
`
`Office of Unfair Import Investigations
`Reginald Lucas, Esq.
`Vu Bui, Esq.
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, SW, Suite 401
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`Reginald.Lucas@usitc.gov
`Vu.Bui@usitc.gov
`
`
`ý Via Hand Delivery (2 Copies on
`9/9/2019)
`¨ Via Overnight Delivery
`¨ Via First Class Mail
`ý Via Electronic Filing (EDIS)
`¨ Via Electronic Mail
`
`
`ý Via Hand Delivery (2 Copies on
`9/9/2019)
`¨ Via Overnight Delivery
`¨ Via First Class Mail
`¨ Via Electronic Filing (EDIS)
`ý Via Electronic Mail
`
`
`¨ Via Hand Delivery
`¨ Via Overnight Delivery
`¨ Via First Class Mail
`¨ Via Electronic Filing (EDIS)
`ý Via Electronic Mail
`
`
`

`

`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`Complainant INVT SPE LLC
`Bryan J. Vogel
`ROBINS KAPLAN LLP
`399 Park Avenue, Suite 3600
`New York, NY 10022
`
`RK_INVT_ITC@RobinsKaplan.com
`
`Respondent Apple, Inc.
`Paul F. Brinkman
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`655 Fifteenth Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20005
`
`Apple-Inventergy@kirkland.com
`
`Respondents HTC Corporation and HTC America,
`Inc.
`Stephen S. Korniczky
`SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER, & HAMPTON LLP
`12275 El Camino Real, Suite 200
`San Diego, CA 92130
`
`LegalTm-HTC-INVT-ITC@sheppardmullin.com
`
`Respondents ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA)
`Jay H. Reiziss
`MCDERMOTT WILL AND EMERY LLP
`500 North Capitol Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20001
`
`ZTEINVT@mwe.com
`
`Respondents HTC Corporation and HTC America,
`Inc., ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA)
`Jesse Hindman
`Hindman APC
`402 W Broadway, Suite 1520
`San Diego, CA 92101
`Telephone: (619) 255-4078
`
`jesse@hindmanapc.com
`
`
`¨ Via Hand Delivery
`¨ Via Overnight Delivery
`¨ Via First Class Mail
`¨ Via Electronic Filing (EDIS)
`ý Via Electronic Mail
`
`¨ Via Hand Delivery
`¨ Via Overnight Delivery
`¨ Via First Class Mail
`¨ Via Electronic Filing (EDIS)
`ý Via Electronic Mail
`
`¨ Via Hand Delivery
`¨ Via Overnight Delivery
`¨ Via First Class Mail
`¨ Via Electronic Filing (EDIS)
`ý Via Electronic Mail
`
`¨ Via Hand Delivery
`¨ Via Overnight Delivery
`¨ Via First Class Mail
`¨ Via Electronic Filing (EDIS)
`ý Via Electronic Mail
`
`¨ Via Hand Delivery
`¨ Via Overnight Delivery
`¨ Via First Class Mail
`¨ Via Electronic Filing (EDIS)
`ý Via Electronic Mail
`
`
`
`

`

`Respondents Apple, Inc.
`Hannah Cannom
`Walker Stevens Cannom LLP
`500 Molino Street, Suite 118
`Los Angeles, California 90013
`Telephone: (213) 337-9972
`
`hcannom@wscllp.com
`
`
`
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`¨ Via Hand Delivery
`¨ Via Overnight Delivery
`¨ Via First Class Mail
`¨ Via Electronic Filing (EDIS)
`ý Via Electronic Mail
`
`
`
`/s/ Stephen G. Nagy
`Stephen G. Nagy
`STRAIN PLLC
`1455 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Suite 400
`Washington, DC 20004
`
`
`
`
`
`