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

EIMER STAHL LLP 

Nathan P. Eimer 

neimer@eimerstahl.com 

Brian Y. Chang (SBN 287757) 

bchang@eimerstahl.com 

224 South Michigan Avenue 

Suite 1100 

Chicago, IL 60604 

Phone: (312) 660-7600 

Fax: (312) 692-1718 

Attorneys for LG Electronics, Inc. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, 

a Delaware corporation, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 5:17-CV-00220-LHK-NMC 

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION OF 

LG ELECTRONICS, INC. 

FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AS 

AMICUS CURIAE 

IN OPPOSITION TO QUALCOMM’S 

MOTION TO STAY THE JUDGMENT 

PENDING APPEAL 

 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1501 Filed 06/11/19 Page 1 of 5
 

 

MOTION OF LG ELECTRONICS, INC. FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AS AMICUS CURIAE 

Case No. 5:17-CV-00220-LHK-NMC 1 

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

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that LG Electronics, Inc. (“LGE”) hereby moves the Court for leave 

to file a brief as amicus curiae in opposition to the motion for a stay pending appeal filed by Defendant 

Qualcomm, Incorporated. (ECF No. 1495). The proposed amicus brief is attached to this motion as 

Exhibit 1. A proposed order granting this motion is attached as Exhibit 3. LGE believes this motion is 

suitable for resolution without a hearing, but it welcomes such a hearing if the Court believes one to be 

necessary. 

INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE 

LGE is a Korean electronics company and an original equipment manufacturer (“OEM”) that 

designs, markets, and sells Cellular Handsets. Op. 3. As an OEM, LGE has suffered numerous harms 

resulting from Qualcomm’s anticompetitive conduct in the chip industry, which this Court has 

detailed. That conduct, as found by this Court, has included “cutting off LGE’s chip supply, threatening 

to withdraw technical support, threatening to require the return of software, charging higher patent 

royalty rates when LGE used a rival’s instead of Qualcomm’s chip, giving LGE chip incentive funds if 

LGE purchased at least 85% of its chips from Qualcomm, and giving rebates on the price of Qualcomm’s 

chips.” Op. 45. To remedy these and other violations, this Court enjoined Qualcomm (1) not to 

condition its supply of modem chips on a customer’s patent license status and to negotiate license terms 

in good faith and in a non-discriminatory manner, op. 227; (2) to make exhaustive SEP licenses available 

to modem-chip suppliers on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) terms, op. 229; and 

(3) not to enter express or de facto exclusive dealing agreements for the supply of modem chips, op. 

229–30. In support of each of these remedies, the Court explicitly cited the risk of ongoing harm to 

LGE, among other businesses and consumers, as a reason justifying relief. 

REASONS WHY THE MOTION SHOULD BE GRANTED 

District courts enjoy “broad discretion” to permit amicus participation, Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F. 

2d 1237, 1260 (9th Cir. 1982) overruled on other grounds by Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, (1995). 

“As this Court has previously recognized, whether to allow Amici to file a brief is solely within the 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1501 Filed 06/11/19 Page 2 of 5
 

 

MOTION OF LG ELECTRONICS, INC. FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AS AMICUS CURIAE 

Case No. 5:17-CV-00220-LHK-NMC 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

Court's discretion, and generally courts have exercised great liberality in permitting amicus

briefs.” California by & through Becerra v. United States Dep’t of the Interior, No. C 17-5948 SBA, 

2019 WL 2223804, at *6 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2019) (citations and alterations omitted). “There are no 

strict prerequisites that must be established prior to qualifying for amicus status; an individual seeking 

to appear as amicus must merely make a showing that his participation is useful or otherwise desirable 

to the court.” Id. 

LGE satisfies this Court’s liberal standard for amicus participation. First, because “issuance of 

the stay [would] substantially injure” LGE, its interest in the pending motion is direct and obvious. Nken 

v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 434 (2009). At this moment, LGE and Qualcomm are negotiating several new 

license agreements, for CDMA, 4G, and 5G, as well as a new chip purchase agreement. Declaration of 

JongSang Lee, June 11, 2019 at ¶ 3, attached as Exhibit 2. As this Court found, there is an extremely 

high risk that Qualcomm will persist in its anticompetitive conduct—and directly harm LGE and any 

other companies currently negotiating with Qualcomm—absent enforcement of this Court’s 

injunction. Because of these imminent risks, LGE’s participation as amicus will prove “useful or 

otherwise desirable to the court” because its proposed brief (Exhibit 1) will illustrate the several ways 

in which “issuance of the stay [would] substantially injure” LGE and likely other Qualcomm customers 

and competitors as well. Luna v. OKeefe, No. 17-CV-02129-LHK, 2018 WL 2197555, at *1 (N.D. Cal. 

May 14, 2018); see also E. Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump, 354 F. Supp. 3d 1085, 1092 (N.D. Cal. 

2018) (noting that the effect-on-interested-parties stay factor “permits the Court to consider the harm to 

non-parties”). LGE’s proposed brief does not otherwise duplicate arguments made by the Federal Trade 

Commission in its opposition, with which LGE agrees. 

 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1501 Filed 06/11/19 Page 3 of 5
 

 

MOTION OF LG ELECTRONICS, INC. FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AS AMICUS CURIAE 

Case No. 5:17-CV-00220-LHK-NMC 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

Dated: June 11, 2019 Respectfully submitted, 

By: _/s/ Nathan P. Eimer__________ 

Nathan P. Eimer 

neimer@eimerstahl.com 

Brian Y. Chang (SBN 287757) 

bchang@eimerstahl.com 

EIMER STAHL LLP 

224 South Michigan Avenue 

Suite 1100 

Chicago, IL 60604 

Phone: (312) 660-7600 

Fax: (312) 692-1718 

Attorneys for 

LG Electronics, Inc. 

 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1501 Filed 06/11/19 Page 4 of 5
 

 

MOTION OF LG ELECTRONICS, INC. FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AS AMICUS CURIAE 

Case No. 5:17-CV-00220-LHK-NMC 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

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

On this 11th day of June, 2019, I hereby certify that I caused the foregoing Notice of Motion 

and Motion of LG Electronics, Inc. for Leave to File Brief as Amicus Curiae in Opposition to 

Qualcomm’s Motion to Stay The Judgment Pending Appeal to be filed via the court’s CM/ECF 

system, which shall send notice to the counsel of record for the parties. 

Dated: June 11, 2019 Respectfully submitted, 

By: _/s/ Nathan P. Eimer___________________ 

Nathan P. Eimer 

Attorney for 

LG Electronics, Inc. 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1501 Filed 06/11/19 Page 5 of 5