In re Qualcomm Inc.

Good Law
162 F. Supp. 3d 1029
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 18, 2016Case No. 5:16-mc-80002-PSG; Case No. 5:16-mc-80003-PSG, Case No. 5:16-mc-80004-PSG, Case No. 5:16-mc-80005-PSG, Case No. 5:16-mc-80006-PSG, Case No. 5:16-mc-80007-PSG, Case No. 5:16-mc-80008-PSGCalifornia7,779 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Grewal, J.

ORDER DENYING APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE TO OBTAIN DISCOVERY FOR USE IN FOREIGN PROCEEDINGS

(Re: Docket No. 1)

A few months back, Applicant Qual-comm Incorporated received an Examiner’s Report from the Korean Fair Trade Commission. The news was not good: the Examiner charged Qualcomm and its licensing of standard-essential patents with violating South Korean antitrust law. The KFTC has set a date for Qualcomm to respond, but Qualcomm must do so without access to any materials the Examiner considered or even cited that were supplied by third parties. Deprived of this access in Korea, Qualcomm now turns to this court for help pursuant to 28 U.S.C. *1032 § 1782 . 1 Constrained in its discretion by the factors set forth by the Supreme Court, 2 the court must DENY Qualcomm’s application, as set forth below.

I.

A curious quirk of our law is that American courts are not limited to American disputes. If foreign tribunals and parties to their proceedings need evidence from third parties located in the United States, they may take discovery of such evidence through a court-supervised procedure enacted by Congress. If the third party is willing to turn over the evidence, no problem. United…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.