PLAINTIFF FTC’S RESPONSE

TO APPLE MOTION TO SEAL

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

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

Jennifer Milici, D.C. Bar No. 987096

Daniel Matheson, D.C. Bar No. 502490

Aaron Ross, D.C. Bar No. 1026902

Mark J. Woodward, D.C. Bar No. 479537

Federal Trade Commission

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20580

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

jmilici@ftc.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission

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

PLAINTIFF FEDERAL TRADE 

COMMISSION’S RESPONSE TO 

APPLE’S MOTION TO SEAL 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1271 Filed 01/11/19 Page 1 of 3
1

PLAINTIFF FTC’S RESPONSE

TO APPLE MOTION TO SEAL

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

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

The FTC does not oppose Apple’s motion to seal certain information that the FTC’s 

proposed patent valuation expert Michael Lasinski may disclose in his testimony, including 

through the use of demonstratives. See ECF No. 1270. The FTC expects that Mr. Lasinski will 

testify on Monday, January 14. See ECF No. 1245 (FTC witness list).

The Court previously granted in part motions to seal information contained in 

demonstratives that Mr. Lasinski will use in connection with his testimony. See ECF No. 1236 

(granting in relevant part Ericsson motion to seal, ECF No. 1233); ECF No. 1263 (granting in part 

Qualcomm motion to seal, ECF No. 1237; Samsung motion to seal, ECF No. 1243; Avanci 

motion to seal, ECF No. 1256; and Nokia motion to seal, ECF No. 1258). Apple seeks to seal 

information that is comparable to information already sealed by the Court with respect to other 

third parties.

The FTC is not currently aware of any other third party that plans to file a motion to seal

information contained in Mr. Lasinski’s demonstratives.

In light of the Court’s orders granting in part motions to seal information that Mr. Lasinski 

may disclose, the FTC expects that the courtroom will have to be sealed for portions of Mr. 

Lasinski’s testimony.

The FTC also does not oppose Apple’s motion to seal portions of QX9121 and QX9114, 

disclosed in connection with anticipated testimony from Apple executive Jeff Williams on 

January 14, 2019, though it notes that the Court sustained the FTC’s high priority objection to the 

use of QX9121 with Mr. Williams. See ECF No. 1267.

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1271 Filed 01/11/19 Page 2 of 3
2

PLAINTIFF FTC’S RESPONSE TO 

APPLE MOTION TO SEAL

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

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: January 11, 2018

Respectfully submitted,

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

/s/ Jennifer Milici

Jennifer Milici

Daniel Matheson

Aaron Ross

Mark J. Woodward

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

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1271 Filed 01/11/19 Page 3 of 3