The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a response criticizing Apple’s recent request to obtain evidence from Samsung in South Korea in the ongoing antitrust case. Here are the details.
A few days ago, Apple filed a request for documents from Samsung Electronics in South Korea as part of its defense against the DOJ in the ongoing antitrust fight over alleged monopoly practices.
Apple’s request came after Samsung’s U.S. subsidiary refused to produce records Apple claims would clarify how competitive the smartphone and smartwatch markets actually are, how often users switch between platforms, and whether Apple’s policies have had the anticompetitive effects alleged in the lawsuit.
According to Samsung U.S., the documents are held only by its Korean parent company, so Apple filed a petition asking the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey to issue a formal letter of request to seek documents from Samsung Electronics in South Korea.
Apple’s request relies on the Hague Evidence Convention, which provides a mechanism for courts to obtain evidence from foreign entities in civil or commercial cases.
If the U.S. court grants Apple’s request, South Korean authorities would still need to decide whether to execute it. Even then, Samsung could raise objections under Korean law that may limit or complicate the production.
Which brings us to today.
In a document submitted to the court, the DOJ pushes back on Apple’s reasoning behind the request, arguing that the company has long known both how central Samsung is to the case and that its Korean parent would likely hold some relevant documents.
The DOJ says that Apple took too long to make this request, argues that the process is unlikely to be completed before the close of fact discovery, and makes clear it should not be used to justify extending deadlines.
The DOJ adds that, if the court does grant the request, Apple “should bear the risk that some or all of the evidence it seeks from South Korea may not return in time.”
From the filing:
Under no circumstances should the complex and time-consuming foreign judicial process under the Hague Convention be grounds for further extending the close of fact discovery or otherwise delay trial in this matter—particularly in light of Apple’s decision to wait nine months before filing its motion.
Interestingly, the DOJ stresses that it takes “no position on whether the Court should issue the Letter of Request,” instead focusing on the possibility of delays to the discovery schedule that might result from this attempt.
You can read the DOJ’s full response below:
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理，仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。