Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-01531/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-01531-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER CONCERNING Case No. 5:09-cv-01531 RS (PVT)

MATERIALS PRODUCED BY 3M PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Yitai Hu (SBN 248085) (yitai.hu@alston.com)

Sean P. DeBruine (SBN 168071) (sean.debruine@alston.com)

C. Augustine Rakow (SBN 254585) (augie.rakow@alston.com)

ALSTON + BIRD LLP

Two Palo Alto Square

3000 El Camino Real, Suite 400

Palo Alto, California 94306

Telephone: 650-838-2000

Facsimile: 650-838-2001

T. Hunter Jefferson (admitted pro hac vice)

(hunter.jefferson@alston.com)

ALSTON + BIRD LLP

One Atlantic Center

1201 West Peachtree Street

Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3424

Telephone: 404-881-7333

Facsimile: 404-253-8863

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant

ELAN MICROELECTRONICS CORPORATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

ELAN MICROELECTRONICS

CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

APPLE, INC.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 5:09-cv-01531-RS (PVT)

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

CONCERNING MATERIALS PRODUCED

BY 3M PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS. )

)

Case 5:09-cv-01531-RS Document 70 Filed 03/16/10 Page 1 of 6
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER CONCERNING Case No. 5:09-cv-01531 RS (PVT)

MATERIALS PRODUCED BY 3M PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA

2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Elan Microelectronics Corporation (“Elan”) and Defendant

Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) (collectively, the “Litigants”) have each served a subpoena on ThirdParty Subpoena recipients 3M Company, 3M Innovative Properties Company, and 3M Touch

Systems, Inc. (“3M”), and in response thereto 3M is engaged in the collection and production of

documents and other materials, including electronic data, as part of the above-captioned

litigation;

WHEREAS, 3M has searched for and gathered a significant quantity of paper and

electronic files that may contain responsive and/or relevant information;

WHEREAS, the Litigants and 3M have determined that in view of the quantity and age

of the materials to be reviewed, and the difficulty on 3M’s part of ascertaining what portions of

such materials are in fact responsive and/or relevant to the Litigants’ requests, it would be

significantly more cost-effective and efficient for the Litigants to inspect the materials to

identify which documents or files each wishes to have 3M copy and produce to the Litigants in

response to their respective subpoenas;

WHEREAS, the Litigants and 3M acknowledge the utility of this process in reducing the

costs and increasing the likelihood that relevant materials will be identified, and further

acknowledge that while 3M has made efforts to identify and withhold from the inspection any

document or file 3M believes is protected from discovery by the attorney-client privilege or the

attorney work product doctrine, in view of the accelerated timetable on which the Litigants wish

access to the materials and the volume and nature of the materials to be reviewed, there is a

possibility that privileged or otherwise protected materials will be produced inadvertently for

inspection;

WHEREAS, following such inspection, 3M will re-review the specific materials

selected for production by the Litigants and will identify and withhold from such production

any materials that it believes are privileged or otherwise immune from discovery; and

WHEREAS, 3M and the Litigants wish to insure that 3M will not be subject to any

claim that it has waived its privilege or other immunity from discovery by having produced

such materials to the Litigants for inspection under these conditions,

Case 5:09-cv-01531-RS Document 70 Filed 03/16/10 Page 2 of 6
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER CONCERNING Case No. 5:09-cv-01531 RS (PVT)

MATERIALS PRODUCED BY 3M PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA

3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

NOW THEREFORE, the Litigants and 3M stipulate and respectfully request the Court

to issue an Order protecting such privileged information on the following terms:

1. In accordance with Federal Rule of Evidence 502 and through agreement,

production for inspection of materials that are privileged or otherwise protected from discovery

will not constitute a waiver of privilege or work product protection for those materials or the

subject matter of those materials in this proceeding or in other Federal or State proceedings

involving the parties to this proceeding or third parties.

2. Once the Litigants have selected the specific documents or electronic files that

they wish to have copied and produced, 3M shall have the right to review such selected

documents and electronic files and to withhold any such selected documents and electronic files

that it reasonably deems to be privileged or otherwise protected from discovery by the attorney

work product doctrine. 3M will produce a log of documents and files withheld from production

on any of the grounds identified in this paragraph.

3. If after producing copies of selected documents and electronic files to the

Litigants 3M discovers that it has inadvertently produced a privileged or work product protected

document or electronic file (which privilege or protection 3M does not intend to waive), 3M

shall be entitled to notify and retrieve the inadvertently produced documents or files as provided

in Paragraph 16 of the Amended Stipulated Protective Order Governing the Use of Disclosure

and Use of Discovery Materials, dated February 11, 2010 (“February Protective Order”).

4. The terms and protections provided by this Order are in addition to the

protections for confidential and privileged information provided by the February Protective

Order, which shall be deemed to apply to materials produced by 3M. In the event of any

apparent conflict between the terms of this Order and the February Protective Order, the terms

most protective of 3M’s rights in its confidential and privileged information shall be deemed to

apply.

//

//

Case 5:09-cv-01531-RS Document 70 Filed 03/16/10 Page 3 of 6
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER CONCERNING Case No. 5:09-cv-01531 RS (PVT)

MATERIALS PRODUCED BY 3M PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA

4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DATED: March 16, 2010 /s/ Hildy Bowbeer

Hildy Bowbeer

Assistant Chief Intellectual Property Counsel

3M COMPANY

3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES CO.

3M TOUCH SYSTEMS, INC.

DATED: March 16, 2010 /s/ Sonal N. Mehta

Sonal N. Mehta

WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP

Attorneys for Apple Inc.

DATED: March 16, 2010 /s/ Sean P. DeBruine

Sean P. DeBruine

ALSTON & BIRD LLP

Attorneys for Elan Microelectronics

Corporation

Case 5:09-cv-01531-RS Document 70 Filed 03/16/10 Page 4 of 6
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER CONCERNING Case No. 5:09-cv-01531 RS (PVT)

MATERIALS PRODUCED BY 3M PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA

5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: ____________, 2010

Hon. Patricia V. Trumbull

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

March 16

Case 5:09-cv-01531-RS Document 70 Filed 03/16/10 Page 5 of 6
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER CONCERNING Case No. 5:09-cv-01531 RS (PVT)

MATERIALS PRODUCED BY 3M PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA

6

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

FILER’S ATTESTATION

I, Sean DeBruine, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to

file this STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER CONCERNING MATERIALS

PRODUCED BY 3M PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA. In compliance with General Order 45,

paragraph X.B. I hereby attest that Sonal Mehta and Hildy Bowbeer have concurred in this

filing.

DATED: March 16, 2010 By: /s/ Sean P. DeBruine

Sean P. DeBruine

ALSTON & BIRD LLP

Attorneys for Elan Microelectronics Corporation

#31,801,175

Case 5:09-cv-01531-RS Document 70 Filed 03/16/10 Page 6 of 6