The U.S. Department of Justice has provided a critical response to Apple’s request for documents from Samsung in South Korea in the ongoing antitrust case. Here are the details.

Some Background

A few days ago, Apple requested documents from Samsung Electronics in South Korea as part of its defense against the Department of Justice in the ongoing antitrust battle.

Apple's request came after Samsung's U.S. subsidiary refused to produce records that it claimed would clarify how competitive Apple’s smartphone and smartwatch markets are, how often users switch between platforms, and whether Apple’s policies have anti-competitive effects as alleged in the case.

According to Samsung, the documents are only held at its parent company in Korea, so Apple filed a motion with the New Jersey District Court to issue a formal request for documents from Samsung Electronics in South Korea.

Apple's request is based on the Hague Evidence Convention, which allows courts to obtain evidence from foreign entities in civil or commercial cases.

If the U.S. court accepts Apple’s request, it will then need to decide whether South Korean authorities will comply. Even then, Samsung may appeal under Korean laws that could limit or complicate production.

This brings us to today.

Department of Justice Criticizes Apple’s Request

In a document submitted to the court, the Department of Justice questions the reasoning behind Apple’s request, arguing that the company has long been aware of how crucial Samsung is to the case and that its parent company in Korea likely holds some relevant documents.

The Department of Justice notes that Apple has spent a lot of time making this request, and it is unlikely that the process will be completed before the actual discovery period ends, stating that it should not be used to extend deadlines.

The Department of Justice adds that if the court grants the request, Apple should "assume the risk that some or all of the evidence requested from South Korea may not return in time."

From the motion:

It should be absolutely clear that the complex and time-consuming foreign judicial process under the Hague Convention should not be a justification for further extending the closure of the actual discovery period or delaying the trial in this case—especially considering Apple’s decision to wait nine months before submitting its request.

Interestingly, the Department of Justice emphasizes that it is not taking a position on whether the court should issue the Request Letter, instead focusing on the delays that this initiative could cause in the discovery schedule.

You can read the Department of Justice's full response below:

Download