JOINT ADR STATUS REPORT

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

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

Counsel Listed on Signature Page

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

vs.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, a Delaware 

corporation,

Defendant.

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

JOINT ADR STATUS REPORT

JUDGE: Hon. Lucy H. Koh

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 785 Filed 07/25/18 Page 1 of 5
1 JOINT ADR STATUS REPORT

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

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

Pursuant to the Court’s July 20, 2018 Order, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and 

Qualcomm Incorporated (together, the “Parties”) have met and conferred and respectfully submit 

this joint ADR status report indicating whether the Parties are willing to engage in an ADR 

session and if so, what type and by when. (ECF No. 783.)

Qualcomm’s Position

Qualcomm has always been and remains willing to take part in ADR or bilateral 

negotiations aimed at resolving this case. To the Court’s specific question, Qualcomm is willing 

to participate in, and believes the Parties could benefit from, a private mediation process 

conducted by a mutually agreeable third-party mediator. Qualcomm is willing to participate in 

such a mediation session by October 12, 2018, which is the week before the scheduled 

October 18, 2018 hearing on any dispositive motions. (ECF No. 678.)

FTC Position

The FTC’s position is that no ADR process is likely to deliver benefits sufficient to justify 

the significant resources that would be consumed by its use. See L.R. 16-8(d)(3). This is a large 

case by any measure with more than 18 million produced documents; deposition testimony from 

more than 90 witnesses; and reports from 13 experts. Educating a mediator or neutral about the 

claims, defenses, and evidence would require significant party and ADR resources and could 

impose a substantial burden on the FTC. ADR is unlikely to add significant value to a bilateral 

negotiation process, which the FTC has been and remains willing to participate in. The FTC 

frequently settles litigation without any formal ADR process and there is no impediment to direct 

settlement negotiations in this case. 

If the Court orders an ADR session, the FTC’s position is that a settlement conference 

with a magistrate judge would be more useful and efficient than early neutral evaluation or 

mediation. The FTC’s view is that a settlement conference would be most useful in the last two 

weeks of August, after the conclusion of expert discovery and prior to the deadline for summary 

judgment and Daubert motions. The FTC does not agree to participate in a private mediation

session.

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 785 Filed 07/25/18 Page 2 of 5
2

JOINT ADR STATUS REPORT

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

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: July 25, 2018

Respectfully submitted,

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

/s/ Jennifer Milici 

Jennifer Milici

Wesley G. Carson

J. Alexander Ansaldo

Joseph R. Baker

Elizabeth A. Gillen

Federal Trade Commission

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20580

(202) 326-2912; (202) 326-3496 (fax)

jmilici@ftc.gov

Attorneys for Federal Trade Commission

Dated: July 25, 2018 CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP

/s/ Gary A. Bornstein 

Gary A. Bornstein

Yonatan Even

CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP

Worldwide Plaza

825 Eighth Avenue

New York, NY 10019

Tel: (212) 474-1000

Fax: (212) 474-3700

gbornstein@cravath.com

yeven@cravath.com

Robert A. Van Nest

Eugene M. Paige

Justina Sessions

KEKER, VAN NEST & PETERS LLP

633 Battery Street

San Francisco, CA 94111-1809

Telephone: (415) 391-5400

Facsimile: (415) 397-7188

rvannest@keker.com

epaige@keker.com

jsessions@keker.com

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 785 Filed 07/25/18 Page 3 of 5
3

JOINT ADR STATUS REPORT

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

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

Richard S. Taffet

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

101 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10178-0060

Tel: (212) 309-6000

Fax: (212) 309-6001

richard.taffet@morganlewis.com

Willard K. Tom

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

1111 Pennsylvania Ave. NW

Washington, DC 20004-2541

Tel: (202) 739-3000

Fax: (202) 739 3001

willard.tom@morganlewis.com

Geoffrey T. Holtz

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

One Market, Spear Street Tower

San Francisco, CA 94105-1126

Tel: (415) 442-1000

Fax: (415) 442-1001

donn.pickett@morganlewis.com

geoffrey.holtz@morganlewis.com

Attorneys for Defendant Qualcomm 

Incorporated

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 785 Filed 07/25/18 Page 4 of 5
4

JOINT ADR STATUS REPORT

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

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, Gary A. Bornstein, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used 

to file this Joint Case Management Statement. In compliance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I 

hereby attest that the signatories on this document have concurred in this filing.

/s/ Gary A. Bornstein

Gary A. Bornstein

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 785 Filed 07/25/18 Page 5 of 5