Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al

Filing 1260

Proposed Order re #1258 MOTION Motion to Clarify Portions of the Court's June 30, 2012 Order Denying Samsung's Motion for Summary Judgment re #1158 Order by Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.. (Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 7/17/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12 APPLE INC., a California corporation,
13
14

CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)

Plaintiff,
vs.

15 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a
Korean business entity; SAMSUNG
16 ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New
York corporation; SAMSUNG
17 TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
18
Defendants.
19
20

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO CLARIFY
PORTIONS OF THE COURT’S JUNE 30,
2012 ORDER DENYING SAMSUNG’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung

21 Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) have filed a Motion to Clarify
22 Portions of the Court’s June 30, 2012 Order Denying Samsung’s Motion for Summary Judgment
23 (“Motion to Clarify”).
24

Having considered the arguments of the parties and the papers submitted, the Court

25 GRANTS Samsung’s Motion to Clarify.

The Court clarifies that the Order Granting-in-Part and

26 Denying-in-Part Motions to Strike Expert Reports (Dkt. No. 1144) is limited to certain opinions
27
28

02198.51855/4863529.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK-PSG
-1[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO CLARIFY PORTIONS OF THE COURT’S
JUNE 30, 2012 ORDER DENYING SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

1 proffered by Samsung’s experts, but does not exclude the use of prior art references contained in
2 Samsung’s experts’ reports for any other purpose.
3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5
6 DATED: _________________, 2012
7
8
9
10

HONORABLE LUCY H. KOH
United States District Court Judge

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

02198.51855/4863529.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK-PSG
-2[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO CLARIFY PORTIONS OF THE COURT’S
JUNE 30, 2012 ORDER DENYING SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT