THX, Ltd. v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 234

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. GRANTING 202 MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD ON CLAIM CONSTRUCTION. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/4/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

SLOT SPEAKER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

Case No. 13-cv-01161-HSG

Plaintiff,
8

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
SUPPLEMENT RECORD ON CLAIM
CONSTRUCTION

v.
9
10

APPLE, INC.,

Re: Dkt. No. 202
Defendant.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

On November 1, 2016, Plaintiff Slot Speaker Technologies, Inc. (“SST”) filed a motion to

14

supplement the record on claim construction with testimony of Justin Crosby (“Motion to

15

Supplement”). Dkt. No. 202. On November 4, 2016, before the briefing on the Motion to

16

Supplement was complete, the Court issued its claim construction order. See Dkt. No. 206. The

17

Court’s claim construction order ruled in SST’s favor with respect to the term addressed by

18

Crosby’s testimony. See id. However, the parties were unable to stipulate to the withdrawal of

19

SST’s Motion to Supplement. See Dkt. No. 210 at 4.

20
21

*

*

*

SST represents that Crosby’s testimony is relevant to the construction of “narrow sound

22

duct” and that SST acted diligently in pursuing the Crosby testimony and moving the Court to

23

supplement the record once Crosby’s testimony was obtained. See generally Dkt. No. 202.

24

Courts in this district have permitted supplementation of the claim construction record with

25

documents produced in discovery after the claim construction hearing has occurred. See e.g.,

26

Tristrata, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 11-CV-03797-JST, 2013 WL 5645984, at *9 (N.D. Cal.

27

Oct. 16, 2013), aff’d, 594 F. App’x 653 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The Court notes that the Crosby

28

testimony would not have affected its construction of “narrow sound duct.” However, despite

1

seeing little practical import for the trial court litigation, the Court GRANTS the Motion to

2

Supplement. The Court leaves to the court of appeals the decision of whether to assess the

3

ultimate significance (if any) of the testimony in construing the claim at issue.

4
5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 1/4/2017
______________________________________
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2