UiEmaANnwel trial iavyers | washington, dc
`777 Sixth Street NW, uth Floor, Washington, District of Columbia 20001-3706 | TEL (202) 538-8000 | FAX (202) §38-B100
`
`
` ~ DOCKET
`NUMBER
`SQ3S
`
`WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL No.
`(202) 538-8104
`
`WRITER'S INTERNET ADDRESS
`alexlasher@quinnemanuel.com
`
`July 7, 2017
`
`VIA HAND DELIVERY
`
`
`
`
`
`J Office of the
`._
`, Secretary
`‘Int'l Trade Commission
`
`ae
`
`
`
`The Honorable Lisa R. Barton, Secretary
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, SW — Room 112
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`Re:
`
`Certain Mobile Electronic Devices And Radio Frequency And Processing Components
`Thereof
`
`Dear Secretary Barton:
`
`Enclosed forfiling, please find documents in support of a request by Qualcomm
`Incorporated (“Complainant”) that the U.S. International Trade Commissioninstitute an
`investigation pursuant to Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, concerningcertain
`mobile electronic devices and radio frequency and processing componentsthereof.
`Complainant’s submission includes the following documents:
`
`1.
`
`2..
`
`One (1) original and eight (8) paper copies of Complainant’s Verified Complaint,
`pursuant to Commission Rule 210.8(a)(1)(i).
`One (1) electronic copy of the public exhibits to the Verified Complaint pursuant to
`Commission Rules 210.8(a)(1)(i) and 210.12(a)(9), including:
`
`a.
`
`one (1) electronic certified copy of each of United States Patent Nos.
`8,633,936 (“the 936 patent”), 8,698,558 (“the 7558 patent”), 8,487,658
`(“the °658 patent”), 8,838,949 (“the °949 patent”), 9,535,490 (“the °490
`patent”), 9,608,675 (“the °675 patent”), copies of which are respectively
`included as Exhibits 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11 to the Verified Complaint pursuant
`to Commission Rule 210.12(a)(9)(i); and
`
`quinn emanuel urquhart 2 sullivan, fp
`LOS ANGELES | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO| SILICON VALLEY | CHICAGO | HOUSTON | LONDON | TOKYO | MANNHEIM| MOSCOW | HAMBURG| PARIS |
`MUNICH | SYDNEY > HONG KONG| BRUSSELS
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)
`QC 2003,p.1
`
`

`

`Page 2
`
`b.
`
`one (1) electronic copy of the certified assignment records for each of the
`’936 patent, 558 patent, 658 patent, °949 patent, °490 patent, and °675
`patent, copies of which are respectively included as Exhibits 2, 4, 6, 8, 10,
`and 12 to the Verified Complaint, pursuant to Commission Rule
`210.12(a)(9)(ii).
`
`One (1) electronic copy ofthe confidential exhibits to the Verified Complaint,
`pursuant to Commission Rules 201.6(c) and 210.8(a)(1)(ii).
`
`One (1) additional copy of the Verified Complaint and accompanyingelectronic
`copies of the public exhibits, for service upon the Proposed Respondent, pursuant to
`Commission Rules 201.6(c) and 210.8(a)(1)(iii); and one (1) additional copy of
`electronic copies of the confidential exhibits to the Verified Complaint for service
`upon the Proposed Respondent’s counselafter it has subscribed to the protective
`order.
`
`Four (4) electronic copies eachofthe certified prosecution history of the ’936
`patent, 558 patent, 658 patent, ’949 patent, ’490 patent, and °675 patent, which are
`respectively identified as Appendices A, C, E, G, I, and K to the Verified
`Complaint, pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(c)(1).
`
`Four (4) electronic copies each of each patent and applicable pages of each
`technical reference mentionedin the prosecution history of the ’936 patent, °558
`" patent, °658 patent, ’949 patent, 490 patent, and ’675 patent, which are respectively
`identified as AppendicesB, D, F, H, J, and L to the Verified Complaint, pursuantto
`Commission Rule 210.12(c)(2).
`
`One physical sample of a representative imported article that is the subject of the
`complaint (Physical Exhibit P1 to the Verified Complaint).
`
`A letter and certification requesting confidential treatment for the information
`contained in confidential exhibits 14C and 16C-27C to the Verified Complaint,
`pursuant to Commission Rules 201.6(b) and 210.5(d).
`
`A Statement on the Public Interest regarding the remedial orders sought by
`Complainantsin the Verified Complaint, pursuant to Commission Rule 210.8(b).
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`Please contact me with any questions regardingthisfiling.
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:19)
`QC 2003,p.2
`
`

`

`Page 3
`
`Dated: July 7, 2017
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`S. Alex Lasher
`Counselfor Complainant Qualcomm
`Incorporated
`
`Enclosures
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:20)
`QC 2003,p.3
`
`

`

`Quinn Emanuel tial tawyers | washington, de
`777 Sixth Street NW, uth Floor, Washington, District of Columbia 20001-3706 | TEL (202) 538-8000 | FAX (202) 538-8100
`
`WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL No.
`(202) 538-8104
`
`WRITER'S INTERNET ADDRESS
`alexlasher@quinnemanuel.com
`
`REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT
`
`July 7, 2017
`
`ViA HAND DELIVERY
`
`The Honorable Lisa R. Barton, Secretary
`U.S, International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, SW — Room 112
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`Certain Mobile Electronic Devices And Radio Frequency And Processing Components
`Re:
`Thereof
`
`Dear Secretary Barton:
`
`Pursuant to Commission Rule 201.6, Complainant Qualcomm Incorporated respectfully
`requests confidential treatmentof certain confidential business information contained in
`confidential exhibits 14C and 16C-27C to the Verified Complaint.
`
`The information in the exhibits for which Complainant seeks confidential treatment
`consists of proprietary commercial information, including confidential and proprietary licensing
`information, technical information related to domestic articles protected by Complainant’s
`asserted patents, technical information related to accused products articles obtained from
`nonpublic teardowns, and financial data regarding Complainant’s domestic investmentsin plant
`and equipmentandlabor andcapital related to domestic articles protected by Complainant’s
`asserted patents.
`
`The proprietary information described herein qualifies as confidential business
`information under Commission Rule 201.6 because substantially-identical information is not
`available to the public, becausethe disclosure ofthis information would cause substantial
`competitive harm to Complainant, and because the disclosure of this information would likely
`impede the Commission’s efforts and ability to obtain similar information in the future.
`
`quinn emmanuel urquhart a sullivan, lip
`LOS ANGELES | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO| SILICON VALLEY | CHICAGO| LONDON | TOKYO | MANNHEIM | MOSCOW | HAMBURG | PARIS
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:21)
`QC 2003,p.4
`
`

`

`Thank youfor your attention. Please contact me with any questions regardingthis
`request for confidential treatment.
`
`Dated: July 7, 2017
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Page 2
`
`(——————rr|
`
`S. Alex Lasher
`Counselfor Complainant Qualcomm
`Incorporated
`
`Enclosure (Certification)
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:22)
`QC 2003,p.5
`
`

`

`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON,D.C.
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`
`
`CERTAIN MOBILE ELECTRONIC
`DEVICES AND RADIO FREQUENCY
`AND PROCESSING COMPONENTS
`THEREOF
`
`Inv. No, 337-TA-
`
`CERTIFICATION
`
`I, S. Alex Lasher, counsel for Complainant Qualcomm Incorporated, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Iam duly authorized by Complainant to execute this certification.
`
`Ihave reviewed confidential exhibits 14C and 16C-27C to Complainant’s Verified
`Complaint, for which Complainant seeks confidential treatment.
`
`3. To the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, founded after a reasonable
`inquiry, substantially-identical information to that contained in the exhibits is not
`available to the public.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true andcorrect.
`
`Executed this 7th day of July, 2017 in Washington, DC.
`
`(Eas
`
`S. Alex Lasher
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:23)
`QC 2003,p.6
`
`

`

`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON,D.C.
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`
`
`CERTAIN MOBILE ELECTRONIC
`DEVICES AND RADIO FREQUENCY
`AND PROCESSING COMPONENTS
`THEREOF
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-
`
`COMPLAINANT’S INITIAL STATEMENT ON THE PUBLIC INTEREST
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:24)
`QC 2003,p.7
`
`

`

`Pursuant
`
`to Commission Rule
`
`210.8(b), Complainant Qualcomm Incorporated
`
`(“Qualcomm”) respectfully submits this Statement on the Public Interest regarding the remedial
`
`orders that Qualcomm seeks against Proposed Respondent AppleInc. (“Apple”). Qualcomm seeks a
`
`permanent limited exclusion order excluding from entry into the United States certain mobile
`
`electronic devices that do not incorporate a Qualcomm brand baseband processor modem andthat
`
`infringe or are manufactured by processes that infringe one or moreof claims 1, 10-27, 29, 38, 49,
`
`55-60, and 67-68 of U.S. Patent No. 8,633,936 (“the °936 patent”), and/or claims 1, 6-11, and 15-20
`
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,698,558 (“the 558 patent”), and/or claims 9, 10, 12, 14, and 20-22 of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,487,658 (“the °658 patent”), and/or claims 1-8, 10-14, 16, 20, and 22 of U.S. Patent
`
`No. 8,838,949 (“the 949 patent”), and/or claims 1-6, 8, 10, 16-17, and 31 of U.S. Patent No.
`
`9,535,490 (“the ?490 patent”), and/or claims 1-3 and 7-14 of U.S. Patent No. 9,608,675 (“the °675
`
`patent”),! either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. Qualcomm also seeks permanent
`
`cease and desist orders prohibiting Apple, its subsidiaries, related companies, and agents from
`
`conducting any ofthe following activities in the United States: importing, admitting or withdrawing
`
`from a foreign trade zone, marketing, advertising, demonstrating, testing, warehousinginventoryof,
`
`distributing, offering for sale, selling, licensing, programming, packaging, repackaging, bundling,
`
`updating, soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for, or aiding and abetting other entities in the
`
`importation, sale for importation, sale after importation, transfer, or distributionofits infringing
`
`mobile electronic devices, or of mobile devices manufactured using processesthat infringe. The
`
`accused mobile electronic devices are the types of products commonly before the Commission and
`
`have been the subject of past remedial orders.
`
`' None ofthe asserted patents are Standards Essential Patents (“SEPs”) and none were declared
`essential to a standards development body norare anyessential to a promulgated standard.
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:25)
`QC 2003,p.8
`
`

`

`The Commission has madeclear that protecting domesticintellectual property rights against
`
`infringing imports is ofparamount importance,andwill only be deniedin exceptional circumstances
`
`where the harm to the public interest is severe. There is no such harm here. Indeed, Qualcomm’s
`
`requested remedial orders serve—rather than harm—thepublic interest. Qualcomm is a global
`
`semiconductorandtelecommunications company, foundedandbasedin the UnitedStates, that has
`
`investedbillions ofdollars in the United States researching and developing innovations which have
`
`enabled wireless telecommunications and countless mobile technologies. Qualcommreliesonits
`
`intellectual property to support and protectthis valuable work. Furthermore, Qualcomm does not
`
`seek exclusion of Apple mobile electronic devices that employ a Qualcomm brand baseband
`
`processor modem. Apple currently imports andsells mobile electronic devicesthat use a Qualcomm
`
`brand baseband processor modem,whicharesufficient (technically and commercially) to fill any
`
`void resulting from the exclusion of Apple mobile electronic devices including non-Qualcomm
`
`brand baseband processor modems. This investigation does not concern Apple mobile electronic
`
`devices employing Qualcomm brand basebandprocessor modems, whichcan easily meetthe public
`
`demand for such devices.
`
`Infringement by use of non-Qualcomm brand baseband processor
`
`modemsis purely a matter of choice on the part of Apple.
`
`Qualcomm’s requested remedial orders raise no public interest concerns because: (I) the
`
`accused products do not serve anyessential public health or welfare objective; (2) any demandfor
`
`the products that would be subjectto the requested remedial orders could befilled by Apple mobile
`
`electronic devices that include Qualcomm brand baseband processor modems; and (3) U.S.
`
`consumers would not face any potential shortage of like or directly competitive products.
`
`Accordingly, this investigation does not present any unique public interest concerns that would
`
`require the Commission to deviate from its practice of issuing remedial orders covering infringing
`
`mobile electronic devices. See, e.g., See, e.g. Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and
`
`2
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:26)
`QC 2003,p.9
`
`

`

`Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-796, Comm’n Op. (Sept. 6, 2013); Certain Electronic
`
`Devices, Including Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices,
`
`and Tablet Computers, Inv. No. 337-TA-794, Comm’n Op. (July 5, 2013); Certain Personal Data
`
`and Mobile Communications Devices and Related Software, Inv. No. 337-TA-710, Comm’n Op.
`
`(Dec. 29, 2011).
`
`I.
`
`USE OF THE ACCUSED PRODUCTSIN THE UNITED STATES
`
`The accused products are Apple’s imported mobile electronic devices that do not incorporate
`
`a Qualcomm brand baseband processor modem,including mobile phonesand tablet computersthat
`
`infringe one or more claimsof the Asserted Patents. These products are manufactured abroad and
`
`sold to consumers throughout the United States.
`
`ll.
`
`©THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS DO NOT PRESENT ANY PUBLIC HEALTH,
`SAFETY, OR WELFARE CONCERNS RELATING TO THE REQUESTED
`REMEDIAL ORDERS
`
`There are no public health, safety, or welfare considerations that weigh against remedial
`
`relief. The accused products are commonconsumergoods, which the Commissionhas consistently
`
`found do notpresent public health, safety or welfare concerns. See, e.g., Electronic Digital Media
`
`Devices, Comm’n Op. at 114-115; Electronic Devices, Comm’n Op. at 109; Personal Data and
`
`Mobile Communications Devices, Comm’n Op. at 76. And Apple has echoed this sentiment in
`
`previous investigations. See Electronic Digital Media Devices, Apple’s Submission on Remedy,
`
`Bond, and Public Interest at 19 (June 11, 2013) (mobile electronic devices “do not have any
`
`specialized public health, safety, or welfare applications, nor are they the type ofproductsthataffect
`public health and welfare”); Personal Data and Mobile Communications Devices, Apple’s Public
`
`Interest Statementat 2 (Aug. 25, 2011) (mobileelectronic devices “do not implicate any particular
`
`public health, safety, or welfare concerns”).
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:17)
`QC 2003,p.10
`
`

`

`Ill..NUMEROUS LIKE OR DIRECTLY COMPETITIVE ARTICLES ARE AVAILABLE
`TO SATISFY DEMAND FOR THE EXCLUDED PRODUCTS
`
`The U.S. mobile electronics marketis highly competitive with a diversefield of participants
`
`offering products that directly compete with Apple’s accused products. Third parties comprise more
`
`than 50 percent of the U.S. smartphone market and could easily ramp up productionto replace any
`
`excluded Apple products. Furthermore, Apple itself sells mobile electronic devices that use a
`
`Qualcomm brand baseband processor modem, which could replace any accused products subject to
`
`an exclusion order.
`
`Further, remedial orders would not have any negative impact on competitive production in
`
`the United States because the accused products and their replacements are manufactured overseas.
`
`The Commission has explained that the consideration of the productionoflike or directly competitive
`
`articles does not weigh against issuance of a remedy when substitute products are available and the
`
`accused products are manufactured overseas. See Certain Digital Televisions & Certain Prods.
`
`Containing Same & Methods of Using Same, Inv. No. 337-TA:617, Comm'n Op.at 15 (Apr. 23,
`
`2009).
`
`IV.
`
`REMEDIAL ORDERS WOULD NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACTU.S. CONSUMERS
`
`Aspreviously discussed, if the Apple accused products are excluded, U.S. consumers will
`continue to have numerousavailable options for mobile electronic devices,including eroduets sold
`
`by Apple that include Qualcomm brand baseband processor modems. Thus, there will be no
`
`reduction in consumerchoice.
`
`¥
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`This investigation does not present any special public interest issues.
`
`Issuance of the
`
`requested remedialrelief against Apple’s accused products will support the strong public interest in
`
`protecting intellectual property rights held by highly innovative companies like Qualcomm. That
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:18)
`QC 2003,p.11
`
`

`

`interest is not outweighed by any hypothetical adverse impactto the U.S. public, especially because
`
`of the significant number of manufacturers that can readily satisfy any new demandcreated by
`
`issuance of the requested remedial orders. Accordingly, the Commission should institute this
`
`investigation without delegating public interest fact-finding to the Administrative Law Judge.
`
`Dated: July 7, 2017
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`SS
`
`. Alex Lasher
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
`777 6th Street NW, 11th Floor
`Washington, DC 20001
`Tel.: (202) 538-8000
`Fax: (202) 538-8100
`
`David A. Nelson
`Stephen Swedlow
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
`500 West MadisonSt., Suite 2450
`Chicago,Illinois 60661
`Telephone:
`(312) 705-7400
`Facsimile: (312) 705-7401
`
`Alexander Rudis
`Richard W. Erwine
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
`51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
`New York, NY 10010
`Tel.: (212) 849-7000
`Fax: (212) 849-7100
`
`Sean S. Pak
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
`50 California Street, 22nd Floor
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`Tel.: (415) 875-6600
`Fax: (415) 875-6700
`
`Tom M. Schaumberg
`Deanna Tanner Okun
`David H. Hollander,Jr.
`
`5
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:19)
`QC 2003,p.12
`
`

`

`Daniel F. Smith
`ADDUCI, MASTRIANI & SCHAUMBERG,L.L.P.
`1133 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., 12th Floor
`Washington, DC 20036
`Tel.: (202) 467-6300
`Fax: (202) 466-2006
`
`Evan R. Chesler
`Keith R. Hummel
`Richard J, Stark
`Gary A. Bornstein
`J. Wesley Earnhardt
`Yonatan Even
`Vanessa A. Lavely
`CRAVATH, SWAINE & Moore LLP
`Worldwide Plaza, 825 Eighth Avenue
`New York, NY 10019
`Tel.: (212) 474-1000
`Fax: (212) 474-3700
`
`Counselfor Complainant Qualcomm Incorporated
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:20)
`QC 2003,p.13
`
`

`

`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON,D.C.
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`
`
`CERTAIN MOBILE ELECTRONIC
`DEVICES AND RADIO FREQUENCY
`AND PROCESSING COMPONENTS
`THEREOF
`
`Investigation No, 337-TA-
`
`COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION337 OF THE
`TARIFF ACT OF 1930, AS AMENDED
`
`Proposed Respondent
`
`Apple Inc.
`1 Infinite Loop
`Cupertino, CA 95014
`Tel. (408) 996-1010
`
`Complainant
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated
`5775 Morehouse Drive
`San Diego, CA 92121
`Tel. (858) 587-1121
`
`Counselfor Complainant Qualcomm
`Incorporated
`
`S. Alex Lasher
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN,
`LLP
`777 6th Street NW, 11th Floor
`Washington, DC 20001
`Tel.: (202) 538-8000
`Fax: (202) 538-8100
`
`David A. Nelson
`Stephen Swedlow
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN,
`LLP
`500 West Madison St., Suite 2450
`Chicago, Illinois 60661
`Tel:
`(312) 705-7400
`Fax: (312) 705-7401
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:21)
`QC 2003, p.14
`
`

`

`Richard W. Erwine
`Alexander Rudis
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN,
`LLP
`51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
`New York, NY 10010
`Tel.: (212) 849-7000
`Fax: (212) 849-7100
`
`Sean S. Pak
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN,
`LLP
`50 California Street, 22nd Floor
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`Tel.: (415) 875-6600
`Fax: (415) 875-6700
`
`Tom M. Schaumberg
`Deanna Tanner Okun
`David H. Hollander, Jr.
`Daniel F. Smith
`ADDUCI, MASTRIANI & SCHAUMBERG,
`L.L.P.
`1133 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., 12th Floor
`Washington, DC 20036
`Tel.: (202) 467-6300
`Fax: (202) 466-2006
`
`-
`
`Evan R. Chesler
`Keith R. Hummel
`Richard J. Stark
`Gary A. Bornstein
`J. Wesley Earnhardt
`Yonatan Even
`Vanessa A. Lavely
`CRAVATH, SWAINE & Moore LLP
`Worldwide Plaza, 825 Eighth Avenue
`New York, NY 10019
`Tel.: (212) 474-1000
`Fax: (212) 474-3700
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:22)
`QC 2003,p.15
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION ossisssscsscsnssesstecrtenssscacestasseniacstarrsenunaineiseaes cisnnananccnonennmeasccrmaanees 1
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated... .csrsnrsisessnssseedanniaveiagavenessuayrsteissoenasasentbadsdacensenesnnniensest
`
`Apple lis ciscasscinsccsominnniiaivinoninniinmninemnninnnnnennnunnnan
`
`Ill.
`
`THE TECHNOLOGIES AND PRODUCTSAT ISSUE..........:seccssseseesosesssoserssssoreenssersenes®
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`PHOGUCSAL ISSBC ow recorescereysnemecnnersecreensennentnsenchscs aubpassndsieasnpsaniasauesiuandinsepeessunireises
`
`Backeround Of The Technology scsscsssccccsieictviccssnierssnionminnnniainnanncds8
`
`IV.
`
`THE ASSERTED PATENTS AND NON-TECHNICAL DESCRIPTIONS OF
`
`A.
`
`The "936 Patent ssccsassucncsapaonenteomsesemnncumanienanienmamurs ans iaaiwecund
`
`i;
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Identification and Ownership of the °936 Patent...........scscsssseeeseseeeeeene LB
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the ’936 Patent............cc.ssosssssosesecseescrsesersosseevre Lo
`
`Non-Technical Description of the °936 Patent..........cccssssesseseeeseeeeee 14
`
`B,
`
`The S58 Patent ssiscccisscsocaensvnvcossmnenavasssineensuvccusaaneavsasasassrnonsexapvarasenseptcenonsennenneesseenc ht
`
`us
`
`2.
`
`33
`
`Identification and Ownership of the ’558 Patent............cssscssssseseereereereere LA
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the 558 Patent........csscssescsscesceesssessersceesensssenee LO
`
`Non-Technical Description of the °558 Patent.............cscssssssessosserseee LS
`
`C3
`
`The 7658 Patent .........cccccsccesscesssesssseeeeessnsstnscecsesssesenseseeesersssecerereeseeseeeeseessseeseees 15
`
`1,
`
`2.
`
`3:
`
`Identification and Ownership of the °658 Patent... cesses LS
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the °658 Patent. ciccccccssssscsisssevensssrceesssnseeasarseve 0
`
`Non-Technical Description of the °658 Patent... ccsscseseseseereeseereeee 16
`
`Dz.
`
`"The 949 Patent .. .ccrenersaonnoeseronvessnsnepnnnstivns4isussnsanioasnsieioini se seni aerate penunuNeio ny aNsaSHOL
`
`I.
`
`Identification and Ownership of the °949 Patent........... cc eecsssssseeseeseee 7
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:23)
`QC 2003,p.16
`
`

`

`2.
`
`3.
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the 7949 Patent.......csscsssescsesesesesesesseestersseeereeee LT
`
`Non-Technical Description of the 949 Patent.........cccscccsesessecereseeseeeeees 18
`
`E.
`
`TG DO PABsa cccanroncecssnenrensinrceeasanmnronncadetemetioninma nenenmnmmmennteranewsammnsnnrneneees 18
`
`1,
`
`i
`
`3.
`
`Identification and Ownership of the 490 Patent...........:cesessesrseerereeeeees 18
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the °490 Patent.........cccccscseseseseseseseseeseseteeeneeenenee LD
`
`Non-Technical Description of the °490 Patent.........cccssssseeserseseeeeeeee 1D
`
`F.
`
`The 6:75. Patent ..-repecnrsrencerersenrernserantussasnsnsisansauapaundsysnsscooassssbeeathusedeheanpevenseussse¥se 19
`
`1,
`
`2
`
`3,
`
`Identification and Ownership of the ’675 Patent..............scssesssoessovsseeess 19
`
`Foreign Countetparts fo the 675 Patent........rvessrsearsorsserorseneseseneecenennes 20
`
`Non-Technical Description of the 675 Patent..........csssssesesseessseeeerseees 20
`
`G,
`
`Licensees to the Assetted Patents io. csscuscsnnssscincscasinissivesissnsesvasansevasrasseeeee b
`
`V.
`
`APPLE’S INFRINGEMENT OF THE ASSERTED PATENTS........ssesessssssseeseeseeesere 2d
`
`A
`
`B
`
`C:
`
`D
`
`E
`
`F.
`
`Infrincement.of Hie 936: Patent......cannnnnasmnnuanmacannnaniananuel
`
`Inifvingement Of the "558 Patent cc cqucccccarmcnasssiawen nastscnanenaroierecennee
`
`Infringementof the ’658 Patent..........ssccseesesssesseeeseceseseseesstessterseessestetsesneeenener 4
`
`Infringement ofthe "949 Patent...siscssscscsssesssesossvsiosossusvassenedsovesaviosisdvenssensssnesensese ded
`
`Infringement of thé "490 Patent: vecrcerccssscmsssacincrasrassastiasccasvinossoceronsesanssesaeaeanns 26
`
`Hetringeient Ofte [GTS Patent ce cncconscocvssenscnemensrsemnenvererennenonnansnennemnenenracenentne 28
`
`VI.
`
`SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF UNFAIR IMPORTATION AND SALE....ccsessssessseesessnees 28
`
`VI
`
`HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE NUMBERS4. jescsscssavosscsesisacascssesosseacsnesewsssserseser
`
`VIII. RELATED LITIGATION.......c.ccccscscsesssesesesssnsnstsestensvesessscscavscessessssssscerasaracssseevseessnesaness D9
`
`IX.
`
`|THE DOMESTIC INDUSTRY RELATING TO THE ASSERTED PATENTG............29
`
`A.
`
`B:
`
`Pechaical Prong cscscsusassvccsesssxorieawinsessarstavernncccsresvesisavsvintenss vesvecatvees coureversaceaveonsenl?
`
`POTION: PONG sasacsuxcascnvcecnieivenseniecan mieseraoremnaecameceimnetioeescmoreternueensenmenmnanserenedte
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:24)
`QC 2003,p.17
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`oytalenralatu|e|olrm|—fz=pe
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14C
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`
`
`Certified Cop
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Rat eee ee oe ieee
`Tein
`
`
`
`
`
`yofU.S.Patent
`0. 8,633,936
`
`
`ertified Assignment Records for U.S. Patent No. 8,698,558
`:
`C
`Certified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 8,487,658
`Certified Assignment Records for U.S. Patent No. 8,487,658
`Certified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 8,838,949
`Certified Assignment Recordsfor U.S. Patent No. 8,838,949
`Certified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 9,535,490
`ertified Assignment Records for U.S, Patent No. 9,535,490
`S
`ertified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 9,608,675
`Certi
`Certified Assignment Records for U.S. Patent No. 9,608,675
`
`C
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`16C
`17C
`18C
`19C
`20C
`21C
`2
`OQ
`
`hyMoybh
`
`4C
`25C
`26C
`27C
`28
`29
`
`
`
`Lad|Oo
`
`
`
`Certificate of Correction for the °558 Patent
`32
`
`
`
`
`Confidential Declaration of Tim Durkin Regarding Economic Domestic Indust
`
`
`Confidential Representative Domestic Industry Claim Charts for the ’936 Patent
`
`
`Confidential Representative Domestic Indus
`i
`i
`i
`Claim Charts for the °558 Patent
`
`
`
`
`
`Confidential Representative Domestic Industry Claim Charts for the ’949 Patent
`Confidential Representative Domestic Industry Claim Charts for the ’490 Patent
`
`
`
`
`
`PHYSICAL EXHIBIT LIST
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Si aa Hf ee ae a
`
`Apple iPhone 7
`
`iii
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:25)
`QC 2003,p.18
`
`

`

`APPENDIX LIST
`
` A
`
`
`
`
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,633,936
`Certified Prosecution History
`Patents and Applicable Pages of Technical References Mentioned in the
`Prosecution History
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,633,936
`Certified Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 8,698,558
`Patents and Applicable Pages of Technical References Mentioned in the
`Prosecution History
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,698,558
`
`
`
`CAm/Ord}trQa;
`
`Patents and Applicable Pages of Technical References Mentionedin the
`Prosecution History
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,487,658
`
`Patents and Applicable Pages of Technical References Mentionedin the
`Prosecution History
`of U.S. Patent No. 8,838,949
`
`Prosecution History
`
`of U.S. Patent No. 9,535,490
`
`Patents and Applicable Pages of Technical References Mentionedin the
`Prosecution History
`of U.S. Patent No. 9,608,675
`
`I |
`
`iv
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:26)
`QC 2003, p.19
`
`

`

`I
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`Complainant Qualcomm Incorporated
`
`(“Qualcomm”
`
`or
`
`“Complainant”)
`
`respectfully files this complaint under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19
`
`U.S.C. § 1337, based on Proposed Respondent Apple Inc.’s (“Apple” or “Respondent”)
`
`unlawful importation into the United States, sale for importation into the United States, and/or
`
`sale within the United States after importation of certain mobile electronic devices, including
`
`mobile phones and tablet computers.
`
`2.
`
`This complaintis directed to Apple’s imported mobile electronic devices that do
`
`not incorporate a Qualcomm brand baseband processor modem,! including mobile phones and
`
`tablet computers, that infringe, or are manufactured by processes that infringe, one or more of
`
`claims 1, 10-27, 29, 38, 49, 55-60, and 67-68 of U.S. Patent No. 8,633,936 (“the °936 patent”),
`
`and/or claims 1 and 6-20 of U.S. Patent No. 8,698,558 (“the ’558 patent”), and/or claims 9, 10,
`
`12, 14, and 20-22 of U.S. Patent No. 8,487,658 (“the °658 patent”), and/or claims 1-8, 10-14,
`
`16, 20, and 22 of U.S. Patent No. 8,838,949 (“the °949 patent”), and/or claims 1-6, 8, 10, 16—
`
`17, and 31 of U.S. Patent No. 9,535,490 (“the ’490 patent”), and/or claims 1-3 and 7-14 of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 9,608,675 (“the °675 patent”) (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”), eitherliterally or
`
`under the doctrine of equivalents. Such products include at least the Apple iPhone 7 that does
`
`not incorporate a Qualcomm brand baseband processor modem (“Accused Devices”).”? The
`
`following table provides a summary of the asserted claims of the Asserted Patents (independent
`
`claimsin bold):
`
`' Qualcomm brand baseband processor modemsare designed,sold, anddistributed by
`Qualcommandits affiliates.
`2
`The identification of a specific model or type of mobile electronic device is not
`intended to limit the scope of the investigation. Discovery may reveal that additional Apple
`products infringe the asserted patent claims and/or that additional claims are infringed.
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:19)(cid:17)
`QC 2003,p.20
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`8,698,558
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`sertedClaims
`
`Emcee
`
`
`
`, 56-60, 67, 68
`
`
`
`1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16-20
`
`
`
`5 5
`
`
`
`
`
`1, 10, 11-18, 19, 20-27, 29, 38, 49, 5
`
`3.
`
`Qualcomm, based in San Diego, California,
`
`is a global semiconductor and
`
`telecommunications company that designs and markets wireless telecommunications products
`
`and services.
`
`It is the largest domestic provider of telecommunications chipsets and software.
`
`Since its founding in 1985, Qualcomm has invested billions of dollars in the United States
`
`researching and developing innovations that have enabled wireless telecommunications and
`
`countless mobile technologies. These market-changing innovations have allowed Qualcomm to
`
`grow into one ofthe largest technology companies in the United States, where it now employs
`
`over 18,000 people, more than two-thirds of whom are engineers.
`
`4,
`Qualcomm helped pioneer advances at
`the heart of cellular connectivity,
`enabling not only Apple’s mobile electronic devices, but also the entire smartphone revolution.
`
`Qualcomm’s patented technologies allow Apple’s mobile electronic devices to send and receive
`
`vast amounts of data at
`
`lightning speed. Qualcomm also invented critical
`
`technologies
`
`improving functions throughout every modern cellular device.
`
`Indeed, Qualcomm’s inventions
`
`make mobile electronic devices desirable to consumersin their daily lives.
`
`5,
`
`Apple is a dominantseller in both the global and domestic markets for mobile
`
`electronic devices. While Apple’s mobile electronic devices are ubiquitous today, Apple had
`
`(cid:50)(cid:36)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:20)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:19)(cid:18)
`QC 2003,p.21
`
`

`

`nothing to do with creating the technology that forms the backbone of the cellular industry.
`
`Instead, Apple rose to dominance relying heavily on Qualcomm’s technology that enables
`
`numerous importantfeatures on the iPhone, including providing better battery life and improved
`
`graphics. Further, the iPhone’s value to customersis driven by its Qualcomm-enabledability to
`
`connect with and transfer data over networks at rapid speeds. Apple CEO Tim Cook has
`
`confirmed on multiple occasions the heavy dependence of the iPhone on high-speed cellular
`
`connectivity for its success.
`
`(Ex. 28, April/October 2016 statements (“There are enormous
`
`investments going on in 4G, and we couldn't be more excited about that becauseit really takes a
`
`great network working with iPhones to produce that great experience for people.”).)
`
`6.
`
`Apple’s unlicensed and unauthorized use of Qualcomm’s technology—including
`
`the technology disclosed in the Asserted Patents—to manufacture,
`
`import and sell mobile
`
`electronic devices in the United States constitutes an unfair act within the meaning of Section
`
`a37.
`
`Ae
`
`On information and belief, the Accused Devices are manufactured and/or sold
`
`for importation into the United States,
`
`imported into the United States, and/or sold after
`
`importation into the United States by or on behalf of Apple.
`
`8.
`
`A domesti