'* .
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page1 of 18
`
`..,
`
`~
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3001
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`No. 12-CV-00630-LHK (PSG)
`
`Apple v Samsung II Video DB
`
`Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs .
`
`..._Date Admitted: ____ By: ___ ...,.
`
`1 CLIP (RUNNING 00:02:14.765)
`
`IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~~III~II~IIIII~~IIII~IIIUI~I
`
`Denison, Justin (Vol. 01)- 07/18/2013
`
`~ VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the start of tape
`
`09:28 ...
`
`DENISON JUSTIN DES
`
`6 SEGMENTS (RUNNING 00:02:14.765)
`
`1. PAGE 5:23 TO 5:24 (RUNNING 00:00:02.034)
`
`23
`24
`
`Q. Good morning, Mr. Denison.
`A. Good morning.
`
`2. PAGE 6:19 TO 7:02 (RUNNING 00:00:22.945)
`
`Q. What is your title at -- well, let me start with
`19
`this: Where do you work?
`20
`A.
`I work at Samsung Telecommunications America.
`21
`Q.
`STA?
`22
`A. Yes.
`23
`Q. Any position at SEC Samsung Electronics
`24
`25 Corporation? Do you hold a position at SEC?
`00007:01
`A. My understanding is STA is part of SEC, so I
`02 guess the answer to that would be yes.
`
`3. PAGE 7:21 TO 8:02 (RUNNING 00:00:17.903)
`
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`00008:01
`02
`
`So you understand in this case between Apple and
`Q.
`Samsung, devices that are at issue, at least from
`Apple's point of view are smartphones and tablets and
`perhaps MP3 players, music players. Do you understand
`that?
`I do.
`A.
`Q. Who designs those devices for Samsung?
`
`4. PAGE 8:04 TO 8:09 (RUNNING 00:00:21.171)
`
`I assume designers do.
`A.
`04
`Q. Designers working for whom?
`05
`A. Well, I think we've established that employees at
`06
`07 STA and SEA ultimately are part of SEC. So I would just
`08
`say by extension, it would be an employee within Samsung
`09 Electronics Corporation.
`
`5. PAGE 8:21 TO 9:07 (RUNNING 00:00:38.450)
`
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`00009:01
`02
`03
`04
`05
`06
`07
`
`I
`I'm not asking for any names or any groups.
`Q.
`just want to know generally or confirm generally that it
`is SEC, Samsung Electronics Corporation, the Korean
`entity that actually designs the smartphones that are
`sold by Samsung?
`A. Again, what I can say is inasmuch as my
`understanding of the corporate structure holds, every
`subsidiary of Samsung Electronics Corporation I can say
`is part of Samsung Electronics Corporation. So the
`design, regardless of which subsidiary it might occur
`within, ultimately is part of Samsung Electronics
`Corporation.
`
`6. PAGE 20:07 TO 20:14 (RUNNING 00:00:32.262)
`
`Q. Does STA write a check for the tablets that it
`07
`receives?
`08
`A. Again, I'm uncomfortable with the question
`09
`10 because I'm not sure it is such a -- what is almost
`11
`implied as an arm's length transaction. We're all part
`12 of the same company. So you know, shipping a tablet
`13
`from what you are calling SEC to SEA or STA, we're all
`
`09:30
`09:30
`
`09:30
`09:30
`09:30
`09:30
`09:30
`09:30
`09:30
`09:30
`09:31
`
`09:32
`09:32
`09:32
`09:32
`09:32
`09:32
`09:32
`
`09:32
`09:32
`09:32
`09:32
`09:32
`09:32
`
`09:33
`09:33
`09:33
`09:33
`09:33
`09:33
`09:33
`09:33
`09:33
`09:33
`09:33
`09:34
`
`09:50
`09:50
`09:50
`09:50
`09:50
`09:51
`09:51
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 1
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3001, Page 1 of 2
`
`BHM 2006
`
`

`

`' ..
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page2 of 18
`
`Apple v Samsung II Video DB
`
`14 part of the same company.
`
`09:51
`
`TOTAL: 1 CLIP FROM 1 DEPOSITION (RUNNING 00:02:14.765)
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 2
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3001, Page 2 of 2
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page3 of 18
`
`Apple v Samsung II Video DB
`
`DiCarlo, Nick (Vol. 01)- 06/26/2013
`
`~ Okay. So you're employed by Samsung, correct? ...
`
`:-,
`~
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3002
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`No. 12-CV-00630-LHK (PSG)
`
`Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs .
`
`.... Date Admitted:
`
`By:
`
`1 CLIP (RUNNING 00:01 :38.504)
`
`DICARLO NICK DES
`
`4 SEGMENTS (RUNNING 00:01 :38.504)
`
`1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
`
`1. PAGE 8:09 TO 8:10 (RUNNING 00:00:05.503)
`
`09
`10 Mike Heyison.
`
`So, Mr. DiCarlo, as I said, my name is
`I'm one of the lawyers for Apple.
`I'm
`
`2. PAGE 8:16 TO 8:25 (RUNNING 00:00:35.911)
`
`Q. Okay. So you're employed by Samsung, correct?
`16
`A.
`Samsung Telecommunications American.
`17
`Q. Okay. And what is your job?
`18
`A.
`I'm the vice president of product planning and
`19
`20 product marketing.
`Q. Okay. What are your duties and
`21
`responsibilities as vice president?
`22
`A.
`I work with US carriers and a local marketing
`23
`team and local STA staff to both plan our products and
`24
`25 market them to carriers and consumers.
`
`3. PAGE 19:12 TO 19:16 (RUNNING 00:00:12.877)
`
`Q.
`So who is Samsung's largest competitor among
`12
`the ones you named?
`13
`A.
`I think that based on market share, Apple
`14
`15 would be the largest smartphone competitor in the -- in
`the US market.
`16
`
`4. PAGE 200:17 TO 201:09 (RUNNING 00:00:44.213)
`
`Is that one of Samsung's marketing strategies
`Q.
`17
`is -- to get more business is switch Apple customers to
`18
`19 Samsung customers?
`A. We've talked, you know, throughout the day
`20
`today that, you know, our strategies, you know, evolve
`21
`22 with the rapidly evolving market. One of the
`23 dimensions, you know, in the kind of closer to today
`time horizon has been, you know, that Apple has a large
`24
`25 population of users, and so if we can switch some of
`them, there's -- there's a benefit to us in that.
`00201:01
`It's, you know, easy to say, hard to do kind of thing,
`02
`so ...
`03
`Q.
`So the answer would be yes, you want to
`04
`05 convert Apple --
`06
`A. To --
`Q.
`-- customers to Samsung customers?
`07
`08
`A. Today that's, you know, a viable portion of
`09 our strategy, yeah.
`
`TOTAL: 1 CLIP FROM 1 DEPOSITION (RUNNING 00:01 :38.504)
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 1
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3002, Page 1 of 1
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page4 of 18
`';LAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 300~
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`No. 12-CV-00630-LHK (PSG)
`Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs .
`
`Apple v Samsung II Video DB
`
`Lee, Jon Won (Vol. 01)- 03/05/2012
`
`~ Okay. Who is your employer? ...
`
`LEE JUN WON DES
`
`9 SEGMENTS (RUNNING 00:04:01.607)
`
`..._Date Admitted: _ _ _ _ By: _ _ _ ~
`
`1 CLIP (RUNNING 00:04:01.607)
`
`11111~111111 ~111111~1111~1 ~1111~11~~
`
`1. PAGE 9:01 TO 9:11 (RUNNING 00:01:00.448)
`Okay. Who is your employer?
`Samsung Electric -- Electronics.
`Okay. Are you employed by any other Samsung
`
`Q
`A
`Q
`entity?
`No.
`A
`Q What is your job title?
`A Director of licensing.
`Q What are your duties and responsibilities as
`director of licensing?
`The licensing-related work in relation to
`A
`mobile phones.
`
`00009:01
`02
`03
`04
`05
`06
`07
`08
`09
`10
`11
`
`2. PAGE 27:18 TO 27:19 (RUNNING 00:00:17.734)
`Q Okay. You testified earlier that you met with
`18
`19 Apple; correct?
`
`3. PAGE 27:21 TO 27:21 (RUNNING 00:00:01.793)
`THE WITNESS: Correct.
`
`21
`
`4. PAGE 31:15 TO 31:16 (RUNNING 00:00:16.020)
`Please tell me in as much detail as you can
`Q
`15
`16 what Apple said and what Samsung said.
`5. PAGE 31:18 TO 31:23 (RUNNING 00:00:50.807)
`Samsung mostly was listening to
`THE WITNESS:
`18
`19 what Apple said in the first meeting. Apple was talking
`about Samsung's smartphone infringed Apple phone's
`20
`2~ patents and design, so they were complaining about our
`infringement about Apple's patent and design in their
`22
`23 phone.
`
`6. PAGE 33:21 TO 33:24 (RUNNING 00:00:33.365)
`Q Okay. So at that first meeting that you
`21
`22 attended, Mr. Lee, do you recall Apple stating that
`23 Samsung had copied Apple's products?
`A Yes.
`24
`
`7. PAGE 37:08 TO 37:09 (RUNNING 00:00:00.927)
`(Exhibit 1 was marked for identification by the
`court reporter.)
`
`08
`09
`
`8. PAGE 37:21 TO 37:25 (RUNNING 00:00:41.410)
`Q Mr. Lee, you testified earlier that you thought
`21
`that Apple made a written presentation at the first
`22
`23 meeting you attended.
`Is this the written presentation that Apple
`24
`25 provided at that meeting?
`
`9. PAGE 38:02 TO 38:05 (RUNNING 00:00:19.103)
`I don't remember the contents of
`THE WITNESS:
`this document entirely, but it appears to be the one.
`MR. HEYISON: Okay.
`
`02
`03
`04
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 1
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3003, Page 1 of 2
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page5 of 18
`
`Apple v Samsung II Video DB
`
`05
`
`THE WITNESS: To my recollection.
`
`TOTAL: 1 CLIP FROM 1 DEPOSITION (RUNNING 00:04:01.607)
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 2
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3003, Page 2 of 2
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page6 of 18
`
`~LAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3004~
`
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`No. 12-CV-00630-LHK (PSG)
`
`Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs .
`
`.... Date Admitted: ___ _ By: ___ ...ollll
`
`1 CLIP (RUNNING 00:01 :42.700)
`
`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll ~1111111111 ~IIIII ~ IIIII IIIII
`
`Apple v Samsung II Video DB
`
`Sheppard, Tim (Vol. 01)- 12/2112011
`
`~ Can you please state your name for ...
`
`SHEPPARD TIM DES
`
`6 SEGMENTS (RUNNING 00:01 :42.700)
`
`1. PAGE 6:12 TO 6:14 (RUNNING 00:00:03.610)
`
`12
`13
`14
`
`Can you please state your name for
`Q.
`the record.
`A.
`My name is Tim Sheppard.
`
`2. PAGE 19:23 TO 20:04 (RUNNING 00:00:18.428)
`
`Do you understand that you're here
`Q.
`23
`to testify as a corporate witness for the
`24
`25 knowledge of STA on certain topics, and you're
`00020:01 also going to be the corporate witness to
`02
`testify on behalf of SEC on certain topics?
`03 Do you understand that?
`04
`A.
`Yes.
`
`3. PAGE 87:23 TO 88:07 (RUNNING 00:00:33.115)
`
`23
`24
`25
`00088:01
`02
`03
`04
`05
`06
`07
`
`And it says, "STA works with SEC to
`Q.
`design, develop, test, commercialize and
`support Samsung telecommunication products
`sold in the United States."
`Do you agree with that last
`statement?
`I do.
`A.
`Q.
`How does STA work with SEC to
`design telecommunication products sold in the
`United States?
`
`4. PAGE 88:10 TO 88:18 (RUNNING 00:00:28.591)
`
`Okay. Very briefly, SEC has a
`A.
`10
`11 corporate R&D team based in Suwon.
`12 BY MS. YOHANNAN:
`13
`Q.
`Based in?
`14
`A.
`Suwon, South Korea, which is the
`15 headquarters of SEC.
`Inside the US market
`16
`there are also teams working under direction
`17
`from that corporate organization to design,
`18 develop, test and commercialize products.
`
`5. PAGE 188:09 TO 188:10 (RUNNING 00:00:04.180)
`
`Does STA have a role in setting
`Q.
`09
`10 wholesale price?
`
`6. PAGE 188:12 TO 188:17 (RUNNING 00:00:14.776)
`
`A. Direct responsibility, no.
`12
`13 sets the wholesale price.
`14 BY MS. YOHANNAN:
`SEC sets the wholesale price for a
`15
`Q.
`16 product being sold to a carrier?
`A.
`Yes.
`17
`
`SEC
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 1
`
`TOTAL: 1 CLIP FROM 1 DEPOSITION (RUNNING 00:01:42.700)
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3004, Page 1 of 1
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page7 of 18
`~
`~
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3005
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`No. 12-CV-00630-LHK (PSG)
`
`Case Clip(s) Detailed Report
`Monday, April14, 2014, 11:22:12 AM
`
`Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs .
`
`....._Date Admitted: _____ By:~~-...,jjj
`
`1 CLIP (RUNNING 00:04:59.023)
`
`1111111111111
`
`AvS 630
`
`0 Bonura, Dr. Thomas - 12/11/2012
`
`~ Bonura CDD Revised
`
`BONURA2
`
`6 SEGMENTS (RUNNING 00:04:59.023)
`
`1. PAGE 25:15 TO 25:17 (RUNNING 00:00:11.930)
`
`15
`Q.
`Putting aside the projects, do you
`16 have an understanding of the invention that's
`17 described in the 647 patent?
`
`2. PAGE 25:20 TO 26:07 (RUNNING 00:01 :06.604)
`
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`00026:01
`02
`03
`04
`05
`06
`07
`
`THE WITNESS:
`I can't put the
`projects aside, because that's all I know
`about.
`What were the name of the projects
`Q.
`to which you're referring?
`A.
`There was LiveDoc. There was data
`detectors, also known as Apple data detectors,
`also known as structure detectors. There was a
`project called LiveSimpleText. There was a
`project called Eudora Live. There was a project
`called 00 Live, or OpenDoc Live, or Live
`OpenDoc.
`I think that characterizes all of the
`terms I remember.
`
`3. PAGE 70:09 TO 70:11 (RUNNING 00:00:08.899)
`
`09
`Q.
`Do you have an understanding of
`10 what it means to say software employs a client
`11
`server model?
`
`4. PAGE 70:13 TO 70:22 (RUNNING 00:00:41.557)
`
`13
`THE WITNESS:
`In general terms, I
`14
`have an idea of what that might be.
`15
`Q.
`And what is that understanding?
`16
`A.
`In very general terms, and this
`17 may not be technically the most precise, but I
`18
`looked at a client server model as a
`19 computational model where there exists some piece
`20 of software that executes and provides
`21
`information to or receives information from
`22 another software component.
`
`5. PAGE 156:23 TO 158:03 (RUNNING 00:01:15.267)
`
`23
`Q.
`If you will grab Exhibit 3.
`24
`A.
`Okay.
`25
`Q.
`I believe this is also an e-mail
`00157:01
`that you wrote?
`02
`A.
`Right.
`03
`Q.
`To Jim Miller, which you discussed
`04 earlier.
`05
`A.
`Yes.
`06
`Q.
`If you look at the fifth
`07 paragraph, there's a sentence that begins, "I am
`08
`looking," do you see that?
`09
`A.
`Yes.
`10
`Q.
`It says, "I am looking into
`11
`implementing the server" -- let me back up. The
`12
`sentence before that says, "Currently
`13 LiveSimpleText has a LiveDoc code, has LiveDoc
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 1
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3005, Page 1 of 2
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page8 of 18
`
`Case Clip(s) Detailed Report
`Monday, April14, 2014, 11:22:12 AM
`
`AvS 630
`
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`00158:01
`02
`03
`
`code linked into the application and also uses
`another application to dispatch content to
`various analyzers. This is the analyzer
`server." Do you see that?
`A.
`I see that.
`Q.
`And then it's written, "I am
`looking into implementing the server as a shared
`library rather than a first class application."
`Do you see that?
`A.
`Yes.
`Q.
`So it's fair to say that at least
`at this time you viewed the server as being able
`to be implemented as a shared library or as a
`first class application; is that fair to say?
`A.
`I think that's fair.
`
`6. PAGE 158:24 TO 160:12 (RUNNING 00:01:34.766)
`
`24
`25
`00159:01
`02
`03
`04
`05
`06
`07
`08
`09
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`00160:01
`02
`03
`04
`05
`06
`07
`08
`09
`10
`11
`12
`
`I believe you said there was a
`Q.
`first or initial LISP-based version that was
`self-contained; is that correct?
`A.
`That's correct. We had all of the
`components that we discussed in one application
`space or address space.
`Q.
`So that implementation did not
`involve a separate application; is that correct?
`A.
`The initial one did not.
`Q.
`Now, that implementation, that had
`functionality that performed the detection of
`structures and associated actions to those
`detected structures; is that correct?
`A.
`That's correct.
`Q.
`And also functionality or code
`that executed those selected actions once a user
`selected the actions?
`A.
`That's correct.
`Q.
`Would you characterize this
`implementation, this first LISP-based
`implementation, as implementing a client server
`model?
`
`Not in the strict sense, no,
`A.
`because everything was -- there was no
`communication between separate processes
`required.
`It was all in one place.
`Q.
`So would it be analogous to more
`of a shared library type model?
`A.
`More analogous to that.
`Q.
`Would you characterize this LISP-
`based implementation as a systemwide service?
`A.
`You could look at the LISP
`implementation as an entire system.
`Q.
`So the functionality that performs
`the detection of structures and the associating
`of actions of those structures, would that
`functionality be -- would you characterize that
`as a systemwide service for that system?
`A.
`Yes, for that system I would.
`
`TOTAL: 1 CLIP FROM 1 DEPOSITION (RUNNING 00:04:59.023)
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page2
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3005, Page 2 of 2
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page9 of 18
`r;LAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 300~
`
`Case Clip(s) Detailed Report
`Thursday, April17, 2014,2:13:50 PM
`
`0 Schiller, Phil - 07/23/2013
`
`~ List the features, sir . ...
`
`Apple v Samsung II Video DB
`
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`No. 12-CV-00630-LHK (PSG)
`
`Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs .
`
`.... Date Admitted: ____ By: ___ _...
`
`1 CLIP (RUNNING 00:01 :26.984)
`
`11111111111111111
`
`SCHP CD
`
`2 SEGMENTS (RUNNING 00:01 :26.984)
`
`1. PAGE 310:21 TO 311:11 (RUNNING 00:00:41.545)
`
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`00311:01
`02
`03
`04
`05
`06
`07
`08
`09
`10
`11
`
`Q. List the features, sir.
`A.
`So for example, you brought up earlier today
`slide to unlock. And if -- I know from the list of
`many features on iPhone, that was a very important
`feature to us to help with ease of use because it's, in
`fact, the very thing you experience you when wake up a
`phone, is how you unlock the screen. And we worked
`very hard on that feature to do slide to unlock.
`To the extent that Samsung has also used our
`slide to unlock feature, I believe that would
`contribute to ease of use of the product.
`Q. That's one.
`Two?
`I'm not
`A. Again, I am giving you examples.
`going to have a long, exhaustive list because I haven't
`studied Samsung's products.
`
`2. PAGE 311:17 TO 312:05 (RUNNING 00:00:45.439)
`
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`00312:01
`02
`03
`04
`05
`
`THE WITNESS: Another feature that we have
`talked a lot about with iPhone is the multitouch
`keyboard, because when we launched the iPhone, previous
`phones, if you call them smartphones, had physical
`keyboards. So convincing customers that it would be a
`nice experience and easy to use a phone that didn't
`have a physical keyboard was a big challenge we had to
`take on. So how the physical keyboard works, how you
`type, how you get the correct, I think it all adds up
`to the ease of use of the product.
`I think that's
`another area. To the extent that if Samsung products
`have similar features, you can infer that they also
`have end user benefits of ease of use like our products
`do.
`
`TOTAL: 1 CLIP FROM 1 DEPOSITION (RUNNING 00:01:26.984)
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 1
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3006, Page 1 of 1
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page10 of 18
`~
`~
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3007
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`No. 12-CV-00630-LHK (PSG)
`
`Case Clip(s) Detailed Report
`Friday, Apri118, 2014, 7:51:03 AM
`
`AvS 630
`
`iCJ Joswiak, Greg- 07/09/2013
`
`~ Are you -- do you have a list of features of ...
`
`Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs .
`
`.... Date Admitted:
`
`By:
`
`1 CLIP (RUNNING 00:01:19.430)
`
`JOZ
`
`1 SEGMENT (RUNNING 00:01 :19.430)
`
`1. PAGE 29:13 TO 30:12 (RUNNING 00:01:19.430)
`
`1111111111111111111
`
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`00030:01
`02
`03
`04
`05
`06
`07
`08
`09
`10
`11
`12
`
`Are you aware of any survey data or market
`Q.
`data, or any data of any nature, that sort of ranks
`what features are more important in terms of
`contributing to ease of use?
`A.
`Not -- we don't typically ask for
`ingredients to ease of use when we survey our
`customers. We would ask, is ease of use important,
`and again, it typically ranks among the top answers
`as to what was important to customers. We generally
`don't dissect it with the ingredients that make that
`up.
`
`I heard you say that you generally don't do
`Q.
`it. So my question is: Are you aware of any data at
`all that tries to drill down on what features are
`more or less important as contributing to ease of
`use?
`It hasn't
`Again, we don't dissect that.
`A.
`been a -- it's been an area we have done very well
`with our customers. Our scores are typically in the
`mid 90s as far as ease of use, satisfaction of ease
`of use for our products.
`So it hasn't been something
`that we have had to do a lot of analysis to
`understand problem areas. Typically, if you have a
`problem area, you might do a little bit more
`dissection.
`
`TOTAL: 1 CLIP FROM 1 DEPOSITION (RUNNING 00:01:19.430)
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 1
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3007, Page 1 of 1
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page11 of 18
`,...
`~
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3008
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`No. 12-CV-00630-LHK (PSG)
`
`Case Clip(s) Detailed Report
`Thursday, April17, 2014, 8:28:19 PM
`
`AvS 630
`
`ICJ Rangel, Art (Vol. 01)- 04/05/2012
`
`~ Q: And so what we see is that for easy to use ...
`
`RANGEL1
`
`1 SEGMENT (RUNNING 00:00:23.334)
`
`1. PAGE 147:10 TO 147:19 (RUNNING 00:00:23.334)
`
`with
`
`10 You're familiar with
`slide to unlock?
`11
`Yes.
`12 A:
`Okay. And again, is that something that
`13 Q:
`you've ever surveyed consumers on separately?
`14
`That's, as far as I recall, always been on
`15 A:
`the iPhone. It's just part of iPhone-ness, if you
`16
`17 will. And so kind of with the -- it goes with the
`ease of use and just what people assume an iPhone
`18
`does.
`19
`
`Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs .
`
`...._Date Admitted: _ _ _ _ By: _ _ _...
`
`1 CLIP (RUNNING 00:00:23.334)
`
`1111111111111111
`
`TOTAL: 1 CLIP FROM 1 DEPOSITION (RUNNING 00:00:23.334)
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 1
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3008, Page 1 of 1
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page12 of 18
`r;,LAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 300~
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`No. 12-CV-00630-LHK (PSG)
`
`Case Clip(s) Detailed Report
`Thursday, April17, 2014, 8:12:15 PM
`
`Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs.
`
`.... Date Admitted:
`
`By:
`
`1 CLIP (RUNNING 00:00:55.799)
`
`11111111111111111
`
`AvS 630
`
`ldJ Chandler, Sarah- 09/20/2013
`
`~ Are there any other reasons that Apple ...
`
`CHANDLER
`
`4 SEGMENTS (RUNNING 00:00:55.799)
`
`1. PAGE 12:03 TO 12:09 (RUNNING 00:00:20.700)
`
`Q. Are there any other reasons that Apple
`03
`takes apart Samsung and other products?
`04
`A. Yes, there are other reasons that we take
`05
`06 apart products.
`Q. And what are those?
`07
`A. One might be to ensure that our
`08
`intellectual property is not being stolen.
`09
`
`2. PAGE 19:15 TO 19:17 (RUNNING 00:00:10.400)
`
`Q. Does Apple ever review competitors'
`15
`16 products for the purpose of trying to find ways to
`improve its own product?
`17
`
`3. PAGE 19:19 TO 19:19 (RUNNING 00:00:01.966)
`
`19
`
`THE WITNESS: Not that I know of.
`
`4. PAGE 19:21 TO 20:04 (RUNNING 00:00:22.733)
`Q. To your knowledge, has that ever happened?
`A. Not to my knowledge.
`Q. To your knowledge, has Apple ever looked at
`a competitor's product or its capabilities and
`decided, based on that review, that Apple should
`pursue a similar capability that a competitor had?
`A. No.
`Q. Never happened?
`A. Not to my knowledge.
`
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`00020:01
`02
`03
`04
`
`TOTAL: 1 CLIP FROM 1 DEPOSITION (RUNNING 00:00:55.799)
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 1
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3009, Page 1 of 1
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page13 of 18
`r;,LAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 301~
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`No. 12-CV-00630-LHK (PSG)
`Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs .
`
`AvS 630
`
`Case Clip(s) Detailed Report
`Monday, April 21, 2014, 9:18:17 PM
`
`'
`
`'
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 1
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3010, Page 1 of 6
`
`.._Date Admitted: _ _ _ _ By: _ _ _ ~
`
`1 CLIP (RUNNING 00:15:22.134)
`
`11111111111111~1111111
`
`0 Maccoun, James- 8/16/2013
`
`~ Good morning, Mr. Maccoun ....
`45 SEGMENTS (RUNNING 00:15:22.134)
`
`MACCOUN
`1. PAGE 5:08 TO 5:09 (RUNNING 00:00:02.372)
`Q. Good morning, Mr. Maccoun.
`A. Good morning.
`
`08
`09
`2. PAGE 5:19 TO 5:22 (RUNNING 00:00:11.103)
`Who are you currently employed by?
`19
`I'm employed by Google Inc.
`A.
`20
`Q. How long have you been employed by Google?
`21
`A. Since 2011.
`22
`3. PAGE 6:04 TO 6:05 (RUNNING 00:00:02.914)
`Q. Are you an attorney?
`I am.
`A. Yes,
`
`04
`05
`4. PAGE 7:21 TO 7:24 (RUNNING 00:00:10.137)
`Q. Do you understand that you are appearing today
`21
`22 as a corporate witness on behalf of Google to give
`testimony in response to several of the topics in this
`23
`24 notice?
`5. PAGE 8:03 TO 8:04 (RUNNING 00:00:06. 793)
`I understand I'm here in response
`THE WITNESS:
`03
`to the -- this subpoena that I have in my hands.
`04
`6. PAGE 13:09 TO 13:15 (RUNNING 00:00:23.233)
`I'm not sure that I understand your answer. So
`Q.
`09
`let me just ask you, Topic 28 asks for any agreement
`10
`11 with or request by Samsung to indemnify it for defense
`12 costs and/or liability related to this litigation. My
`Is there any agreement with Samsung
`13 question to you is:
`to indemnify it for defense costs or liability related
`14
`to this litigation?
`15
`7. PAGE 13:18 TO 13:21 (RUNNING 00:00:17.377)
`THE WITNESS: There is a Mobile Applications
`18
`19 Development Agreement, and I understand that to be an
`agreement between Google Inc. and Samsung relating to
`20
`indemnity and defense.
`21
`8. PAGE 14:08 TO 14:11 (RUNNING 00:00:09.072)
`Pursuant to that agreement that you just
`08
`referred to, has Google agreed to indemnify Samsung for
`09
`any liability or defense costs associated with this
`10
`litigation?
`11
`9. PAGE 14:16 TO 14:19 (RUNNING 00:00:35.986)
`So I understand that Google is
`THE WITNESS:
`16
`17 defending Samsung and that this is reflected by emails.
`18 The -- I think that's probably a good way to
`19 characterize it.
`
`09:39
`
`09:38
`
`09:51
`
`09:51
`
`09:52
`
`09:52
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page14 of 18
`
`Case Clip(s) Detailed Report
`Monday, April 21, 2014, 9:18:17 PM
`
`AvS 630
`
`10. PAGE 15:09 TO 15:14 (RUNNING 00:00:03.391)
`
`MR. STONE: Would you please mark that as
`09
`10 Exhibit 2, please.
`(Exhibit 2, Email string from Susan Kim to
`11
`Daniel.ko®samsung.com, 12/7/12,
`12
`GOOG-NDCAL630-00069118 - 124, marked for
`13
`identification.)
`14
`
`11. PAGE 15:15 TO 15:18 (RUNNING 00:00:07.143)
`
`15 BY MR. STONE:
`Q. Mr. Maccoun, have you seen what's been marked
`16
`17 as Exhibit 2 before?
`A. Yes, I have.
`18
`
`12. PAGE 17:19 TO 17:23 (RUNNING 00:00:03.920)
`
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`
`MR. STONE: Mark this as Exhibit 3, please.
`(Exhibit 3, Letter to Andy Rubin from
`JaeHyoung Kim, 4/5/12,
`GOOG-NDCAL630-00065923 - 24, marked for
`identification.)
`
`13. PAGE 17:24 TO 18:09 (RUNNING 00:00:38.443)
`
`24
`25
`00018:01
`02
`03
`04
`05
`06
`07
`08
`09
`
`BY MR. STONE:
`Q. Do you recognize what's been marked as.
`Exhibit 3, Mr. Maccoun?
`I do.
`A. Yes,
`Q. What is it?
`It's a letter from Samsung to Google.
`A.
`Q. And was this letter Samsung's initial request
`to be indemnified for this litigation by Google?
`I'm not aware of any earlier request.
`A.
`Q. This is the first request that you're aware of;
`is that correct?
`
`14. PAGE 18:11 TO 18:12 (RUNNING 00:00:03.169)
`
`11
`12
`
`THE WITNESS: This is the first request that
`I'm aware of, yes.
`
`15. PAGE 19:09 TO 19:13 (RUNNING 00:00:16.410)
`
`'
`
`Q. What is the Mobile Application Distribution
`09
`I guess you referred to it as the M-A-D-A or
`10 Agreement?
`11 MADA.
`12
`13
`
`It's an agreement between Google and Samsung.
`What's the purpose of the agreement?
`
`A.
`Q.
`
`16. PAGE 19:18 TO 19:25 (RUNNING 00:00:25.126)
`
`I suppose it had a variety
`THE WITNESS: Well,
`18
`19 of purposes. But one of them is to provide
`20 applications -- for Google to provide applications to
`21 Samsung. But there were other purposes that are set
`forth in the agreement.
`22
`23 BY MR. STONE:
`Q. And I take it one provision of the agreement
`24
`relates to indemnification of Samsung by Google?
`25
`
`17. PAGE 20:03 TO 20:05 (RUNNING 00:00:06.131)
`
`So I recall that the MADA does
`THE WITNESS:
`03
`04 have provisions relating to defense and indemnification.
`05 BY MR. STONE:
`
`18. PAGE 20:06 TO 20:07 (RUNNING 00:00:03.410)
`
`06
`
`Q. And the same is true for the Strategic
`
`09:55
`
`09:55
`
`09:59
`
`09:59
`
`10:01
`
`10:01
`
`10:02
`
`10:02
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 2
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3010, Page 2 of 6
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page15 of 18
`
`Case Clip(s) Detailed Report
`Monday, April 21, 2014, 9:18:17 PM
`
`(.,·
`
`AvS 630
`
`'
`
`07 Marketing Agreement?
`
`19. PAGE 20:10 TO 20:15 (RUNNING 00:00:19.798)
`THE WITNESS: Well, I -- it would be helpful to
`10
`see it. But in general, I seem to recall that the
`11
`12 Strategic Marketing Agreement simply incorporated the
`13 provisions of the MADA -- or stated something to the
`14 effect that the MADA would be similarly used. Something
`like that.
`15
`
`10:02
`
`10:02
`
`20. PAGE 20:16 TO 20:21 (RUNNING 00:00:03.767)
`MR. STONE: Would you please mark this as
`16
`17 Exhibit 4.
`(Exhibit 4, Letter to JaeHyoung Kim and
`18
`Seong-Woo Kim from Allen Lo, 5/21/12,
`19
`GOOG-NDCAL630-00065935 - 37, marked for
`20
`identification.)
`21
`
`21. PAGE 20:22 TO 21:07 (RUNNING 00:00:48.844)
`MR. STONE: Exhibit 3, which we were just
`looking at, was dated April 5th. And it was a letter of
`JaeHyoung Kim of Samsung to Mr. Andy Rubin of Google.
`Exhibit 4 is a letter from Allen Lo of Google,
`Deputy General Counsel Patents and Patent Litigation, to
`JaeHyoung Kim. And it's dated May 21, 2012. Subject
`"Apple litigation alleged patent infringement."
`is:
`Q. Have you seen this exhibit before?
`A. Yes, I have.
`Is this Google's response to Samsung's request
`Q.
`for indemnification, dated April 5th, 2012?
`
`22
`23
`24
`25
`00021:01
`02
`03
`04
`05
`06
`07
`
`22. PAGE 21:10TO 21:12 (RUNNING 00:00:07.987)
`THE WITNESS: The document does state, in the
`10
`first sentence, that it's a response to the letter of
`11
`12 April 5th, 2012.
`
`23. PAGE 21:14 TO 21:16 (RUNNING 00:00:08.833)
`In this letter, did Google agree to
`Q. Okay.
`indemnify Samsung for any of the claims in the
`litigation?
`
`14
`15
`16
`
`24. PAGE 21:21 TO 22:01 (RUNNING 00:00:17.135)
`So as I read it, Google's
`THE WITNESS:
`21
`22 essentially offering to defend Samsung to the MADA and
`23 does offer to defend some -- some claims.
`24 BY MR. STONE:
`Q. Which claims does Google offer to defend in
`25
`this letter?
`00022:01
`
`25. PAGE 22:02 TO 22:04 (RUNNING 00:00:11.362)
`It seems to be stated in this last full
`A.
`02
`03 paragraph of the second page that -- more or less, the
`04 parameters.
`
`26. PAGE 22:05 TO 22:16 (RUNNING 00:00:59.466)
`Q. Are you referring to the sentence that states:
`05
`"We believe that Apple's allegations in Apple Inc.
`06
`07 Versus Samsung Electronics Company Limited, et al., Case
`08 Number 511CV00630LHK, regarding asserted U.S. Patent
`09 Number" -- and then it refers to the '959 patent and the
`'604 patent -- "may fall within this obligation"?
`10
`A. Yeah, but I believe that, more or less, is the
`11
`12 essence of this.
`
`10:03
`
`10:04
`
`10:04
`
`10:04
`
`10:05
`
`10:06
`
`10:07
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`page 3
`
`PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO. 3010, Page 3 of 6
`
`

`

`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1920 Filed06/16/14 Page16 of 18
`
`Case Clip(s) Detailed Report
`Monday, April 21, 2014, 9:18:17 PM
`
`AvS 630
`
`So is it your understanding that in this
`Q.
`13
`letter, Google's offering to indemnify Samsung for the
`14
`15 claims made with respect to those two patents but not to
`16 any other claims in litigation?
`
`10:07
`
`27. PAGE 22:18 TO 22:20 (RUNNING 00:00:22.839)
`
`So I believe that there is -- in
`THE WITNESS:
`18
`the December -- December 5th email, there may be
`19
`20 additional claims that Google is offering to defend.
`
`10:08
`
`28. PAGE 27:16 TO 27:20 (RUNNING 00:00:17.036)
`
`So Google is offering to defend and indemnify
`Q.
`16
`17 Samsung with respect to the claims regarding the '959
`and '604 patents and is requesting that Samsung tender
`18
`Is that what you
`the defense of those claims to it?
`19
`20 understand this letter is doing?
`
`29. PAGE 27:22 TO 28:02 (RUNNING 00:00:33.019)
`
`So Google is asking Samsung to
`THE WITNESS:
`22
`tender the defense so that Google can defend Samsung.
`23
`24 And that's really what I see this sentence saying.
`25 BY MR. STONE:
`Q. When you say "tender the defense," what does
`00028:01
`that mean, to tender the defense?
`02
`
`30. PAGE 28:06 TO 28:07 (RUNNING 00:00:03.596)
`
`06
`07
`
`THE WITNESS: This is a requirement that's set
`forth in the MADA.
`
`31. PAGE 28:09 TO 28:09 (RUNNING 00:00:01.763)
`
`09
`
`Q. And what is that requirement?
`
`32. PAGE 28:15 TO 28:18 (RUNNING 00:00:25.201)
`
`10:19
`
`10:19
`
`15
`16
`17
`18
`
`THE WITNESS: And so I understand it to be a
`legal term of art, more or less, allowing the indemnitor
`to control the litigation and defense. That's more or
`less a summary of the idea.
`
`10:20
`
`33. PAGE 32:18 TO 33:21 (RUNNING 00:02:27.411)
`
`Q. Mr. Maccoun, I'd like to turn back to what was
`18
`19 previously marked as Exhibit 2 to your deposition,
`20 Exhibit