Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 56-1 Filed 08/05/19 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 1103
`EXHIBIT A
`
`SUMMARY OF DEFENDANT APPLE INC.’S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO
`MAXELL, LTD.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 1-9)
`
`Interrogatory
`
`Apple Response
`
`1. Not currently in dispute
`
`2. To the extent You contend that any Accused
`Product does not infringe any Asserted Claim of any
`Patent-in-Suit, state, with particularity for each such
`claim, limitation-by- limitation, Your full basis for
`any such contention.
`
`3. Identify all patent licenses, covenants-not-to-sue,
`or other agreements Concerning patents or
`intellectual property (collectively, “Agreements”) to
`which You are a party that relate to the Accused
`Products or products that are reasonably similar to
`the Accused Products, and, for each such
`Agreement, identify the parties, the date it was
`entered into, the termination date (if any), the
`royalty rate and/or consideration paid, and identify
`how the parties arrived at such royalty rate and/or
`consideration.
`
`4. For each Accused Product, state in detail on a
`monthly, quarterly and yearly basis, all sales,
`revenues, income, and profits generated by or
`realized from the licensing, sales or distribution of
`such product from 2013 to present, including but not
`limited to, (a) the number of units sold, distributed,
`and/or licensed, (b) the gross revenue (dollars)
`generated from the sales, distribution, and/or
`licensing, (c) the production cost, (d) the gross
`profit margin attendant to the sales, distribution,
`and/or licensing, (e) the net profit margin attendant
`to the sales, distribution, and/or licensing, (f) the
`Entities responsible for the sales, distribution,
`and/or licensing, (g) the customers of the sales,
`
`1
`
`Apple has not engaged in any acts that constitute
`direct or indirect infringement of any valid claim
`of any Patent-in-Suit, either literally or under the
`doctrine of equivalents, willfully or otherwise.
`Apple will disclose
`its non-infringement
`defenses in its rebuttal expert report, according to
`the schedule contemplated by the Docket Control
`Order (D.I. 46), as required by the local rules in
`the Eastern District of Texas. On the basis of its
`objections, Apple will not otherwise respond to
`this interrogatory.
`
`At an appropriate time contemplated by the
`Docket Control Order (D.I. 46), Apple will
`identify documents pursuant to Federal Rule of
`Civil Procedure 33(d) from which Maxell may
`derive information regarding Apple patent
`licenses or other agreements that Apple
`contends are comparable to a license that would
`result from a hypothetical reasonable royalty
`negotiation regarding the Patents-in-Suit and/or
`that may be used by Apple to support its
`defenses. On the basis of its objections, Apple
`will not provide further information regarding
`“how the parties arrived at such royalty rate
`and/or consideration.” Apple reserves the right
`to supplement its response to this interrogatory.
`
`At an appropriate time contemplated by the
`Docket Control Order (D.I. 46), Apple will
`identify documents pursuant to Federal Rule of
`Civil Procedure 33(d) from which Maxell may
`derive information regarding revenues, costs,
`and/or profits relating to sales in the United
`States of Accused Products identified in
`Maxell’s Infringement Contentions during the
`relevant time period. On the basis of its
`objections, Apple will not provide other
`information requested in this interrogatory.
`
`Apple reserves the right to supplement its
`response to this interrogatory.
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 56-1 Filed 08/05/19 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 1104
`EXHIBIT A
`
`Interrogatory
`
`Apple Response
`
`At an appropriate time contemplated by the
`Docket Control Order (D.I. 46), Apple will
`identify documents pursuant to Federal Rule of
`Civil Procedure 33(d) from which Maxell may
`derive information regarding when Apple first
`learned of the Patents-in-Suit. On the basis of its
`objections, Apple will not provide other
`information requested in this interrogatory.
`
`Apple reserves the right to supplement its
`response to this interrogatory.
`
`On the basis of its objections, Apple will not
`provide a response to this interrogatory at this
`time.
`
`distribution, and/or licensing, and (h) the location of
`such sales, distribution, and/or licensing.
`
`5. For each Patent-in-Suit, state with particularity
`the circumstances surrounding Your first awareness
`of the patent, including the date when You first
`became aware of the patent, the Persons involved in
`the circumstances and events when You first
`became aware of the patent, the identity and content
`of any Communications or Documents relating to
`Your awareness of the patent, and all actions taken
`by You relating to, or as a result of, Your becoming
`aware of the patent, including any Communications,
`Documents, and/or actions related to a potential
`business arrangement between Maxell and Apple.
`
`6. Complete the attached chart entitled
`“Interrogatory No. 6” identifying for each Accused
`Product the supplier, internal model number, and
`supplier model number of the relevant components
`implicated by the Patents-in-Suit, such as the
`components implicated in implementing or
`performing the Accused Features or Functions,
`including the dates Apple utilized such components
`in each Accused Product, and identify the cost to
`You for each component from 2013 to present. If
`there are any other components configured to
`implement the Accused Features or Functions from
`2013 to present, identify such component and the
`requested information at the end of the chart.
`
`7. Identify the steps, if any, You have ever taken to
`avoid infringing any claim of any Patent-in-Suit.
`For instance, include in Your response a description
`of all activities and circumstances relating to any
`actual, proposed, contemplated, or attempted design
`modifications involving each Accused Product since
`becoming aware of such Patent-in-Suit.
`
`Apple has not engaged in any acts that
`constitute direct or indirect infringement of any
`valid claim of any Patent-in-Suit, either literally
`or under the doctrine of equivalents, willfully or
`otherwise. On the basis of its objections, Apple
`will not otherwise respond to this interrogatory
`at this time.
`
`8. If You contend that acceptable, non-infringing
`alternatives to the inventions claimed in the Patents-
`in-Suit have existed or exist, specifically describe
`each alternative, state when it became available,
`describe in detail the basis for Your contention that
`it is non-infringing, and identify all Documents
`related to this contention.
`
`Apple has not engaged in any acts that
`constitute direct or indirect infringement of any
`valid claim of any Patent-in-Suit, either literally
`or under the doctrine of equivalents, willfully or
`otherwise. At an appropriate time contemplated
`by the Docket Control Order (D.I. 46), Apple
`will disclose expert opinions relating to
`acceptable alternatives to the purported
`inventions claimed by Patents-in-Suit. On the
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 56-1 Filed 08/05/19 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 1105
`EXHIBIT A
`
`Interrogatory
`
`Apple Response
`
`9. State all facts and identify, by bates number, all
`Documents related to any sales forecasts and/or
`projections prepared by or for You, including
`without limitation forecasts and/or projections
`related to projected revenue, profitability, and/or
`units of iPhones, iPads, iPod Touches, Apple
`Watches, and Mac products expected or anticipated
`to be sold or distributed in the United States on or
`before 2022.
`
`basis of its objections, Apple will not otherwise
`respond to this interrogatory at this time.
`
`At an appropriate time contemplated by the
`Docket Control Order (D.I. 46), Apple will
`identify documents pursuant to Federal Rule of
`Civil Procedure 33(d) from which Maxell may
`derive information responsive to this
`interrogatory. Apple will only produce
`documents responsive to this interrogatory
`regarding products accused by Maxell in its
`Infringement Contentions. Apple will not
`identify or produce any documents regarding
`products that have not yet been released or that
`are not named in Maxell’s Infringement
`Contentions. Apple reserves the right to
`supplement its response to this interrogatory.
`
`3
`
`