Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2309 Filed04/16/13 Page1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

HAROLD J. MCELHINNY (CA SBN 66781) hmcelhinny@mofo.com MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664) mjacobs@mofo.com RACHEL KREVANS (CA SBN 116421) rkrevans@mofo.com JENNIFER LEE TAYLOR (CA SBN 161368) jtaylor@mofo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant APPLE INC.

WILLIAM F. LEE william.lee@wilmerhale.com WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 60 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Telephone: (617) 526-6000 Facsimile: (617) 526-5000 MARK D. SELWYN (SBN 244180) mark.selwyn@wilmerhale.com WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 950 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 Telephone: (650) 858-6000 Facsimile: (650) 858-6100

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION APPLE INC., Case No. Plaintiff, 11-cv-01846-LHK

15 16 v. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
DECLARATION OF NATHAN SABRI IN SUPPORT OF APPLES RESPONSE REGARDING PATENTS IN REEXAMINATION

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a Korean business entity; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New York corporation; SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Defendants.

DECLARATION OF NATHAN SABRI IN SUPPORT OF APPLES RESPONSE TO SAMSUNGS STATEMENT REGARDING PATENTS IN REEXAMINATION

CASE NO. 11-CV-01846 LHK sf-3271433

Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2309 Filed04/16/13 Page2 of 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

I, NATHAN SABRI, declare as follows: 1. I am an attorney with the law firm of Morrison & Foerster LLP, counsel for Apple

Inc. (Apple). I am licensed to practice law in the State of California. I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein or understand them to be true. I submit this declaration in support of Apples Response to Samsungs Statement Regarding Patents in Reexamination. 2. Attached as Exhibit A are true and correct copies of flowcharts from the MPEP

illustrating the reexamination process, annotated to show the position of the reexaminations of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,469,381 and 7,844,915. 3. Attached as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of a printout from the USPTO

website, available at www.uspto.gov/ip/boards/bpai/stats/perform/fy2012_perform.jsp. 4. Attached as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of a printout from the Federal

Circuit website, available at www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/thecourt/statistics/Median_Disposition_Time_Table_2003-2012.pdf. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 16th day of April, 2013 at San Francisco, California.

/s/ Nathan Sabri Nathan Sabri

DECLARATION OF NATHAN SABRI IN SUPPORT OF APPLES RESPONSE REGARDING PATENTS IN REEXAMINATION

CASE NO. 11-CV-01846 LHK sf-3271433

Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2309 Filed04/16/13 Page3 of 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

ATTESTATION OF E-FILED SIGNATURE I, Michael A. Jacobs, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this Declaration. In compliance with Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that Nathan Sabri has concurred in this filing. Dated: April 16, 2013 /s/ Michael A. Jacobs Michael A. Jacobs

DECLARATION OF NATHAN SABRI IN SUPPORT OF APPLES RESPONSE REGARDING PATENTS IN REEXAMINATION

CASE NO. 11-CV-01846 LHK sf-3271433

Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2309-1 Filed04/16/13 Page1 of 3

EXHIBIT A

Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2309-1 Filed04/16/13 Page2 of 3

CITATION OF PRIOR ART AND EX PARTE REEXAMINATION OF PATENTS

2201

**>

Ex Parte Reexamination - PROCEDURE PRIOR TO APPEAL

(applicable rule section)
Request for Reexamination filed (1.510)
Notice of request Published in O.G. (1.11(c)) No ; reexam is denied Substantial
New Question?

Yes

Petition Filed Under 1.515(c)?

(1.515(a)) No Reexamination Is Terminated Petition Denied Yes Reexamination ordered (1.525)

Petition Granted Requester petition to Director of the Office to review whether a substantial New examiner new question exists (1.515(c)) assigned

Patent owner statement? No

Yes

Pat. owner statement (1.530(b) & (c))

No

Requester reply ? Yes

Third party requester reply (1.535) Panel review conducted at each stage of examination, other than for non-merits actions such as notices of informality or incomplete response. Appeal conference is panel review prior to Examiners Answer

Examiner issues Office action (1.104) All Claims Found Patentable Patent owner responds to Office action ? Yes No Response Notice of Intent to Issue Reexamination Certificate

'915 Patent reexam

Patent Owner response after non-final action (1.111)

No

Examiner issues action. Is it a final rejection ? Yes

No Response To Final Rejection

'381 Patent reexam

No Amendment After Final

Examiner issues final rejection (1.113)

Pat. Owner paper after final rejection (1.116)

Examiner considers the paper (1.116)

Examiner reopens Prosecution? No Patent Owner files Notice of Appeal (41.31)

Yes

2200-3

Rev. 7, July 2008

Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2309-1 Filed04/16/13 Page3 of 3

2201

MANUAL OF PATENT EXAMINING PROCEDURE

Flowchart Ex Parte Reexamination - Procedure From Time of Appeal

Ex Parte Reexamination PROCEDURE FROM TIME OF APPEAL

(applicable rule section)

Go to flowchart (procedure prior to appeal): Exr. Issues Action. Is it a final rejection?

Patent Owner files Notice of Appeal (41.31) Appeal brief not filed Patent Owner files Appeal Brief (41.37)

on previous chart Appeal Conference Notice of Intent to Issue Reexamination Certificate

No Examiners Answer Issued? Yes** Patent Owner initiates new appeal Examiners Answer (41.39(a)) ** Where examiner changes position to add new ground of rejection; prosecution must be reopened

Patent Owner response under 1.111 or 1.113. **

Patent Owner files Reply Brief (41.41(a)) Office Action Reopening Prosecution (41.43(a)(1))

Acknowledge Reply Brief (41.43(a)(1))

Patent Owner amendment and/or Showing of facts See 41.50(b)(1)

New ground of rejection (41.50(b))

Board Decision (41.50)

Examiner affirmed at least in part; no new ground Examiner reversed

Patent Owner Takes Further Action 41.50(b)(2) Yes

No

Notice of Intent to Issue Reexamination Certificate

Patent Owner requests rehearing (41.50(b)(2)) Granted Denied

Patent Owner appeal to CAFC (1.301). For some reexaminations***, option to file appeal As Civil action (1.303) *** i.e., where the reexamination was filed prior to November 29, 1999 Yes

Court Decision

Go to Board Decision

Patent Owner Takes Further Action No

<

Rev. 7, July 2008

2200-4

Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2309-2 Filed04/16/13 Page1 of 2

EXHIBIT B

FY 2012 Performance Measures Page 1 of 1 Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2309-2 Filed04/16/13 Page2 of 2

PATENTS TRADEMARKS IP LAW & POLICY PRODUCTS & SERVICES INVENTORS NEWS & NOTICES FAQs ABOUT US

FY 2012 Performance Measures

FISCAL YEAR 2012 United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Performance Measures APPEAL PENDENCY MEASURES Pendency of decided appeals from Appeal number assignment date to decision date (average number of months) Pendency of decided appeals from Notice of Appeal (average number of months) INTERFERENCE PENDENCY MEASURES Pendency of terminated Interferences (average number of months) Interferences Terminated in less than 2 years (% of Interferences Terminated) 7 11 7 11 9 21 23 23 23 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr FY12 Cumulative

35

36

37

36

100.0%

88.0%

93.0%

93.0%

94.0%

This page is owned by Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

Last Modified: 10/15/2012 12:58:25 PM

http://www.uspto.gov/ip/boards/bpai/stats/perform/fy2012_perform.jsp

4/6/2013

Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2309-3 Filed04/16/13 Page1 of 2

EXHIBIT C

Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document2309-3 Filed04/16/13 Page2 of 2

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Median Time to Disposition in Cases Terminated After Hearing or Submission 1
Docketing Date2 to Disposition Date, in Months

FY 03 District Court Court of Federal Claims Court of International Trade Court of Appeals Veterans Claims Board of Contract Appeals Department of Veterans Affairs Department of Justice International Trade Commission Merit Systems Protection Board Office of Compliance Patent and Trademark Office
Overall Median per Fiscal Year

FY 04 11.7 11.0 12.0 10.0 9.7 n/a n/a 16.0 6.9 10.1 9.6 10.0

FY 05 11.6 11.2 11.5 9.9 10.5 14.4 n/a 16.4 7.5 13.3 10.3 9.9

FY 06 11.5 10.0 11.7 8.4 11.7 13.7 n/a 15.6 6.5 14.0 10.0 9.3

FY 07 11.6 10.0 11.9 8.4 10.4 11.3 n/a 13.6 6.4 n/a 9.6 9.1

FY 08 11.0 9.2 12.4 8.0 9.6 4.8 n/a 14.4 5.8 19.0 8.9 9.0

FY 09 11.0 10.3 11.5 9.3 11.9 18.9 8.9 14.4 6.5 n/a 9.3 9.3

FY 10 11.0 10.0 11.0 9.3 8.8 n/a 8.9 14.8 6.1 13.0 8.2 9.1

FY 11 11.2 10.6 12.2 6.0 10.0 19.4 n/a 14.6 6.1 15.0 11.2 9.7

FY 12 11.8 9.9 12.6 8.6 11.5 15.7 n/a 16.1 6.4 n/a 11.7 9.9

Overall Median per Origin

11.3 9.8 11.2 10.6 12.6 13.8 n/a 17.1 7.6 19.6 9.5 9.6

11.3 10.2 11.7 8.8 10.9 14.0 8.9 15.0 6.6 13.6 9.8

1 2

Excludes cross and consolidated appeals, writs, and OPM petitions Calculated from Date of Docketing or Date of Reinstatement, whichever is later