UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, D.C. 20436
`
`Before Honorable Charles E. Bullock
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-626
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN NOISE CANCELLING
`HEADPHONES
`
`
`
`COMPLAINANT BOSE CORPORATION’S REQUEST
`FOR RECEIPT OF EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS
`
`
`
`Pursuant to Ground Rule 9.4.13 and Order Nos. 2 and 12, Complainant Bose Corporation
`
`(“Bose”) hereby submits its Request for Receipt of Evidence Without a Sponsoring Witness and
`
`accompanying Declaration of Steven A. Bowers in support thereof. Specifically, and as further
`
`set forth in this Request, Bose hereby requests that the Administrative Law Judge receive into
`
`evidence the following true copies of: (1) exhibits listed on the parties’ proposed Joint Exhibit
`
`List, including certified copies of the asserted patents and their prosecution histories; (2)
`
`deposition transcripts and exhibits, including exhibits discussed therein, of persons who are
`
`located outside the United States and cannot be subpoenaed for trial; (3) deposition transcripts,
`
`including exhibits thereto, of third party witnesses; (4) deposition transcripts, including exhibits
`
`thereto, of Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses; and (5) other documents where no party has submitted any
`
`objection to their admission.1
`
`
`1
`Pursuant to Order No. 12, parties are to submit their objections to direct exhibits on
`September 30, 2008. Parties are to submit their proposed rebuttal exhibits, including rebuttal
`witness statements, on October 2, 2008. Bose reserves the right to amend this request to include
`rebuttal exhibits that are to be filed on October 2, 2008. Parties’ objections to rebuttal witness
`statements are to be submitted on October 29, 2008.
`
`

`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Good cause exists to admit these exhibits into evidence, as they are relevant, material,
`
`reliable, and non-controversial. Moreover, Complainants make this request in order to
`
`streamline the hearing and to avoid the process of requiring a witness to identify and authenticate
`
`certain non-controversial exhibits. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth below and in the
`
`accompanying declaration, Complainant respectfully requests that each of the following exhibits
`
`be admitted into evidence without a sponsoring witness at the hearing.
`
`II.
`
`APPLICABLE STANDARD
`
`Commission Rule 210.37 provides that “[r]elevant material and reliable evidence shall be
`
`admitted into the record.” 19 C.F.R. § 210.37. Ground Rule 9.4.13 provides, “if a party believes
`
`evidence to be non-controversial and to be appropriate for receipt in evidence without a
`
`sponsoring witness, that party may present with each such exhibit on or before the due date set
`
`forth in the procedural schedule: (1) an affidavit or declaration that the declarant prepared or
`
`someone under the declarant’s direction prepared the exhibit; (2) a request that the exhibit be
`
`received in evidence without a witness at the trial; and (3) a statement of grounds for receiving
`
`the exhibit in evidence without a witness at the trial.”
`
`III. ARGUMENT
`
`A. Materials Listed on the Joint Exhibit List
`
`Bose submits that documents and things listed on the [proposed] Joint Exhibit list should
`
`be received at trial without a sponsoring witness. The existence of and the content within the
`
`proposed joint exhibits are non-controversial and the admission into evidence of these exhibits is
`
`not objected to by any party:
`
`
`COMPLAINANT BOSE CORPORATION’S REQUEST FOR
`RECEIPT OF EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS—PAGE 2
`
`

`
`JX-1 – JX-60C and JPX-1 – JPX-8.
`
`B.
`
`Deposition Transcripts of Persons Outside the United States Who Cannot be
`Subpoenaed for Trial and Exhibits Discussed Therein
`
`Certain fact witnesses, who are employees of Respondents, are residents of New Zealand
`
`and thus outside the United States, and beyond the subpoena power of this Court. Thus, the
`
`deposition transcripts of those witnesses and the exhibits discussed therein should be admitted
`
`into evidence without a sponsoring witness. See Commission Rule 210.28(h)(3)(ii). The
`
`admission of these deposition transcripts and exhibits is not prejudicial to any party and is
`
`necessary to create a complete record in this Investigation. Therefore, the following deposition
`
`transcripts and exhibits discussed therein should be received into evidence:
`
`CX-56C (Fuller Dep. Tr.) and CX-1256C, CX-1261C, CX-1263C,
`CX-1267C, CX-1268C, CX-1273C, CX-1277C, CX-1286C, CX-
`1287C, CX-1299 (Fuller Dep. Exhs.); CX-63C (Guiu Dep. Tr.) and
`CX-64C to CX-73C, CX-74, CX-75C to CX-77C (Guiu Dep.
`Exhs.); CX-90C (Moody Dep. Tr.) and CX-91C, CX-1275C
`(Moody Dep. Exhs.); CX-92C (Morris Dep. Tr.) and CX-93C to
`CX-99C (Morris Dep. Exhs.); CX-100 (Powell Dep. Tr.) and CX-
`101C to CX-104C (Powell Dep. Exhs.); CX-134C (Sim Dep. Tr.)
`and CX-135C to CX-140C (Sim Dep. Exhs.); CX-141C (Swinyard
`Dep. Tr.) and CX-142C to CX-146C (Swinyard Dep. Exhs.); CX-
`172C (Donaldson Dep. Tr.) and CX-902C, CX-903C, CX-1259C,
`CX-1262C, CX-1266C, CX-1269C, CX-1270C, CX-1280C, CX-
`1285C, CX-1289C, CX-1291C, CX-1293C, CX-1294C, CX-1310
`(Donaldson Dep. Exhs.); and CX-173C (Dobrodolski Dep. Tr.) and
`CX-174C to CX-181C.
`
`C.
`
`Deposition Transcripts of Third Parties
`
`Complainant requests that depositions of third parties, and exhibits discussed therein,
`
`should be admitted into evidence without a sponsoring witness at trial. The admission of these
`
`deposition transcripts and exhibits is not prejudicial to any party, removes the burden of
`
`appearing at trial from third parties, and is necessary to create a more complete record in this
`
`
`
`COMPLAINANT BOSE CORPORATION’S REQUEST FOR
`RECEIPT OF EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS—PAGE 3
`
`

`
`Investigation. The following third party depositions and exhibits therein should be received into
`
`evidence:
`
`CX-105C – CX-133C, CX-148, and CX-150C – 170C.
`
`D.
`
`Deposition Transcripts and Exhibits of Rule 30(b)(6) Witnesses and Exhibits
`discussed therein
`
`Complainants request that depositions of Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses, and exhibits discussed
`
`therein, should be admitted into evidence without a sponsoring witness at trial. See Commission
`
`Rule 210.28(h)(2). The admission of these deposition transcripts and exhibits is not prejudicial
`
`to any party and is necessary to create a more complete record in this Investigation. The
`
`following Rule 30(b)(6) depositions and exhibits discussed therein should be received into
`
`evidence:
`
`CX-85C (Lunt Dep. Tr.) and CX-86C to CX-89C, CX-140C, CX-
`1258C, CX-1260C, CX-1264C, CX-1271C, CX-1272C, CX-
`1274C, CX-1276C, CX-1281C, CX-1283C, CX-1284C, CX-
`1288C, CX-1295 to CX-,1298C, CX-1300C, CX-1303C to CX-
`1309C (Lunt Dep. Exhs.); CX-53C (Erickson Dep. Tr.) and CX-
`55, CX-1385C (Erickson Dep. Tr.); CX-1469C (Cajka Dep. Tr.)
`and CX-1470C, CX-1471 to CX-1473C (Cajka Dep. Exhs.); CX-
`57C (Green Dep. Tr.) and CX-58C, CX-59C (Green Depo. Exhs.);
`CX-182C (Edwards Dep. Tr.) and CX-47C to CX-50C, CX-52C,
`CX-183C to CX-185C (Edwards Dep. Exhs.); and CX-78C
`(Hantson Dep. Tr.) and CX-79C to CX-81C, CX-83C
`
`E.
`
`Other Documents Which No Party Has Submitted Any Objection to Their
`Admission
`
`Complainant submits that other exhibits (not included above and those listed on
`
`Complainant’s rebuttal exhibit list) for which no party submits any objections to their admission
`
`should be received without the need of a sponsoring witness at trial.
`
`IV. CONCLUSION
`
`
`
`COMPLAINANT BOSE CORPORATION’S REQUEST FOR
`RECEIPT OF EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS—PAGE 4
`
`

`
`For the reasons stated above, Complainant respectfully requests that the Judge receive the
`
`above exhibits without a sponsoring witness at trial.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`___/s/ Autumn J.S. Hwang________________
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`Ruffin B. Cordell
`Andrew R. Kopsidas
`Jeffrey R. Whieldon
`Autumn J.S. Hwang
`Steven A. Bowers
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`1425 K Street, N.W.
`11th Floor
`Washington, D.C. 20005
`Telephone: (202) 783-5070
`Facsimile: (202) 783-2331
`
`Charles Hieken
`Gregory A. Madera
`Stephen A. Marshall
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`225 Franklin Street
`Boston, MA 02110
`Telephone: (617) 542-5070
`Facsimile: (617) 542-8906
`
`Jordan T. Fowles
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`1717 Main Street
`Suite 5000
`Dallas, TX 75201
`Telephone: (214) 747-5070
`Facsimile: (214) 747-2091
`
`Attorneys for Complainant
`Bose Corporation
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: September 25, 2008
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINANT BOSE CORPORATION’S REQUEST FOR
`RECEIPT OF EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS—PAGE 5
`
`

`
`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMIVIISSION
`
`WASHINGTON, D.C. 20436
`
`Before Honorable Charles E. Bullock
`
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`Investigation No. 337—TA—626
`
`
`
` In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN NOISE CANCELLING
`
` HEADPHONES
`
`
`DECLARATION OF STEVEN A. BOWERS IN SUPPORT OF
`
`COIVEPLAINANT BOSE CORPORATION’S REQUEST
`FOR RECEIPT OF EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS
`
`1, Steven A. Bowers, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I am a member of the bars of California and the District of Columbia and am an
`
`associate with Fish & Richardson P.C., outside counsel for Complainant Bose Corporation
`
`(“Bose”) in this Investigation.
`
`2.
`
`I submit this Declaration in support of Bose’s request that certain exhibits be
`
`admitted into evidence without a sponsoring witness at trial.
`
`3.
`
`Under my direction, I caused true and correct copies the following exhibits
`
`included in the proposed Joint Exhibit List to be submitted to the Administrative Law Judge as
`
`proposed exhibits: JX-1 — JX-60C and JPX-l — JPX-8.
`
`4.
`
`Under my direction, I caused true and correct copies of the following exhibits,
`
`which are deposition transcripts of persons outside the United States who cannot be subpoenaed
`
`for trial and the exhibits discussed therein to be submitted to the Administrative Law Judge as
`
`proposed exhibits: CX—56C (Fuller Dep. Tr.) and CX-1256C, CX—1261C, CX-1263C, CX-
`
`1267C, CX-1268C, CX—1273C, CX-1277C, CX-1286C, CX-1287C, CX-1299 (Fuller Dep.
`
`Exhs.); CX—63C (Guiu Dep. Tr.) and CX-64C to CX-73C, CX—74, CX-75C to CX—77C (Guiu
`
`

`
`Dep. Exhs.); CX-90C (Moody Dep. Tr.) and CX-91C, CX—1275C (Moody Dep. Exhs.); CX-92C
`
`(Morris Dep. Tr.) and CX—93C to CX-99C (Morris Dep. Exhs.); CX—lO0 (Powell Dep. Tr.) and
`
`CX-l0lC to CX-104C (Powell Dep. Exhs.); CX-134C (Sim Dep. Tr.) and CX—l35C to CX-l40C
`
`(Sim Dep. Exhs.); CX—14lC (Swinyard Dep. Tr.) and CX—l42C to CX—l46C (Swinyard Dep.
`
`Exhs.); CX-l72C (Donaldson Dep. Tr.) and CX-902C, CX—903C, CX—1259C, CX-1262C, CX-
`
`l266C, CX-1269C, CX-1270C, CX-1280C, CX-1285C, CX-1289C, CX—129lC, CX-1293C,
`
`CX—1294C, CX—13l0 (Donaldson Dep. Exhs.); and CX-173C (Dobrodolski Dep. Tr.) and CX-
`
`l74C to CX-181C.
`
`5.
`
`Under my direction, I caused true and correct copies of the following exhibits,
`
`which are deposition transcripts of third parties and the exhibits discussed therein to be submitted
`
`to the Administrative Law Judge as proposed exhibits: CX-105C — CX-133C, CX—l48, and CX-
`
`150C — 170C.
`
`6.
`
`Under my direction, I caused true and correct copies of the following exhibits,
`
`which are deposition transcripts of Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses and the exhibits discussed therein to
`
`be submitted to the Administrative Law Judge as proposed exhibits: CX-85C (Lunt Dep. Tr.)
`
`and CX-86C to CX-89C, CX-140C, CX~1258C, CX-1260C, CX-1264C, CX—1271C, CX-1272C,
`
`CX-1274C, CX-1276C, CX—128lC, CX—1283C, CX-1284C, CX-1288C, CX-1295 to CX-
`
`,l298C, CX-1300C, CX-1303C to CX-l309C (Lunt Dep. Exhs.); CX-53C (Erickson Dep. Tr.)
`
`and CX-55, CX-1385C (Erickson Dep. Tr.); CX-1469C (Cajka Dep. Tr.) and CX-1470C, CX-
`
`l47l to CX-1473C (Cajka Dep. Exhs.); CX—57C (Green Dep. Tr.) and CX—58C, CX-59C (Green
`
`Depo. Exhs.); CX-182C (Edwards Dep. Tr.) and CX-47C to CX-SOC, CX-52C, CX—183C to CX-
`
`185C (Edwards Dep. Exhs.); and CX—78C (Hantson Dep. Tr.) and CX-79C to CX—8lC, CX-83C
`
`DECLARATION OF STEVEN A. BOWERS IN SUPPORT OF
`
`COMPLAINANT BosE CoRPoRATIoN’s REQUEST FOR
`RECEIPT OF EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS-—PAGE 2
`
`

`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that to the best of my knowledge the foregoing is true
`
`and correct.
`
`Dated: September 25, 2008
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`%wfl.&w\
`
`Steven A. Bowers
`
`DECLARATION OF STEVEN A. BOWERS IN SUPPORT OF
`
`COMPLAINANT BOsE CORPORATION’s REQUEST FOR
`RECEIPT OF EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS-—PAGE 3
`
`

`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on September 25, 2008, a copy of
`
`COMPLAINANT BOSE CORPORATION’S REQUESTS FOR RECEIPT OF
`EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS
`
`
`
`__________________________________
`
`was served on the following as indicated:
`
`
`
`Marilyn R. Abbott
`Secretary
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E. Street, S.W., Room 112-F
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`
`
`
`The Honorable Charles E. Bullock
`Administrative Law Judge
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, S.W., Room 317-I
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`
`
`Christopher Paulraj, Esq.
`T. Spence Chubb, Esq.
`Office of Unfair Import Investigations
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, S.W., Room 404-I
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Via Hand Delivery
` Via U.S. Mail
` Via Overnight Delivery
` Via Electronic Mail
` Via Facsimile
` Via Electronic Docket Filing
` Not Served
`
` Via Hand Delivery
` Via U.S. Mail
` Via Overnight Delivery
` Via Electronic Mail
` Via Facsimile
` Via Electronic Docket Filing
` Not Served
`
` Via Hand Delivery
` Via U.S. Mail
` Via Overnight Delivery
` Via Electronic Mail
` Via Facsimile
` Via Electronic Docket Filing
` Not Served
`
`
`
`COMPLAINANT BOSE CORPORATION’S REQUEST FOR
`RECEIPT OF EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS—PAGE 6
`
`

`
`
`William B. Nash, Esq.
`Daniel D. Chapman, Esq.
`Mark Fassold, Esq.
`Jackson Walker L.L.P.
`112 E. Pecan Street., Suite 2400
`San Antonio, TX 78209
`
`Counsel for Respondents Phitek Systems
`Limited, GN Netcom, Inc., Creative Labs, Inc.,
`and Logitech Inc.
`
`
`Alan Cope Johnston, Esq.
`G. Brian Busey, Esq.
`Cynthia Lopez Beverage, Esq.
`Morrison & Foerster LLP
`2000 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Suite 5500
`Washington, DC 20006-1888
`
`Counsel for Respondents Phitek Systems
`Limited, GN Netcom, Inc., Creative Labs, Inc.,
`and Logitech Inc.
`
`
`James P. White, Esq.
`J. Aron Carnahan, Esq.
`Welsh & Katz, Ltd.
`120 South Riverside Plaza, 22nd Floor
`Chicago, IL. 60606
`
`Counsel for Respondent Audio Technica U.S.,
`Inc.
`
`
`Arthur Wineburg, Esq.
`Daniel E. Yonan, Esq.
`Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
`1333 New Hampshire Ave., N.W.
`Washington, DC 20036
`
`Counsel for Respondent Audio Technica U.S.,
`Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Via Hand Delivery
` Via U.S. Mail
` Via Overnight Delivery
` Via Electronic Mail
` Via Facsimile
` Via Electronic Docket Filing
` Not Served
`
` Via Hand Delivery
` Via U.S. Mail
` Via Overnight Delivery
` Via Electronic Mail
` Via Facsimile
` Via Electronic Docket Filing
` Not Served
`
` Via Hand Delivery
` Via U.S. Mail
` Via Overnight Delivery
` Via Electronic Mail
` Via Facsimile
` Via Electronic Docket Filing
` Not Served
`
` Via Hand Delivery
` Via U.S. Mail
` Via Overnight Delivery
` Via Electronic Mail
` Via Facsimile
` Via Electronic Docket Filing
` Not Served
`
`
`
`COMPLAINANT BOSE CORPORATION’S REQUEST FOR
`RECEIPT OF EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS—PAGE 7
`
`

`
`
`Daniel Ebenstein, Esq.
`Abraham Kasdan, Esq.
`Joseph Casino, Esq.
`Amster, Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP
`90 Park Avenue
`New York, NY 10016
`
`Counsel for Respondent Panasonic
`Corporation of North America
`
`
`Tom M. Schaumberg, Esq.
`Jamie D. Underwood, Esq.
`Adduci, Mastriani & Schaumberg, LLP
`1200 Seventh Street, N.W., Fifth Floor
`Washington, DC 20036
`
`Counsel for Respondent Panasonic
`Corporation of North America
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Via Hand Delivery
` Via U.S. Mail
` Via Overnight Delivery
` Via Electronic Mail
` Via Facsimile
` Via Electronic Docket Filing
` Not Served
`
` Via Hand Delivery
` Via U.S. Mail
` Via Overnight Delivery
` Via Electronic Mail
` Via Facsimile
` Via Electronic Docket Filing
` Not Served
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`_/s/ Patrick Edelin, Jr.__________________
`Patrick Edelin, Jr.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINANT BOSE CORPORATION’S REQUEST FOR
`RECEIPT OF EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPONSORING WITNESS—PAGE 8