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

Filing 1392

MOTION De Novo Determination of Dispositive Matter Referred to Magistrate Judge, in the Alternative, Motion for Relief from Nondispositive Pretrial Order of Magistrate Judge filed by Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.. Responses due by 8/9/2012. Replies due by 8/16/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 7/26/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION

16
17 APPLE INC., a California corporation,

CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK

18

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR DE NOVO
DETERMINATION OF DISPOSITIVE
MATTER REFERRED TO MAGISTRATE
JUDGE AND DENYING APPLE’S
MOTION FOR ADVERSE INFERENCE
JURY INSTRUCTION

19

Plaintiff,
vs.

20 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a
Korean business entity; SAMSUNG
21 ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New
York corporation; SAMSUNG
22 TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
23
Defendant.
24
25
26
27
28
02198.51855/4876792.2

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR DE NOVO DETERMINATION OF
DISPOSITIVE MATTER REFERRED TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING APPLE’S MOTION FOR
ADVERSE INFERENCE JURY INSTRUCTION

1

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

2 Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) have filed a Motion for De Novo
3 Determination of Dispositive Matter Referred to Magistrate Judge (“Motion for De Novo
4 Determination”).
5

The Court having heard oral argument and conducted a de novo review of Apple’s Motion

6 for Adverse Inference Jury Instruction (“Apple’s Motion for Adverse Inference”) (Dkt. No. 895),
7 including all associated briefing and declarations, and the Magistrate Judge’s Order Granting-In8 Part (Dkt. No. 1321), and having considered the arguments of the parties and the papers submitted,
9 the Court GRANTS Samsung’s Motion for De Novo Determination, and DENIES Apple’s Motion
10 for Adverse Inference.
11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14 DATED: _________________, 2012
15
16
17
18

HONORABLE LUCY H. KOH
United States District Court Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
02198.51855/4876792.2

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR DE NOVO DETERMINATION OF
DISPOSITIVE MATTER REFERRED TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING APPLE’S MOTION FOR
ADVERSE INFERENCE JURY INSTRUCTION