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

Filing 1426

Case Management ORDER. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 7/27/2012. (lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/27/2012) Modified on 7/27/2012 (lhklc2, COURT STAFF). Counsel are advised to review the section on "Information for Jurors" for additional information not discussed at the Case Management Conference.

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 SAN JOSE DIVISION 4 APPLE INC., a California corporation, 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) ) SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., A ) Korean business entity; SAMSUNG ) ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New York ) corporation; SAMSUNG ) TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, ) a Delaware limited liability company, ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK MINUTE ORDER AND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER 12 13 Clerk: Martha Parker Brown Reporter: Lee-Anne Shortridge Length of hearing: 14 15 16 Plaintiff Attorneys: Harold McElhinny, Michael Jacobs, Rachel Krevans and William Lee Defense Attorneys: Victoria Maroulis, Kevin Johnson, Charlie Price, and Michael Zeller. Third Party Attorneys: Karl Olson (Reuters America); Robert McCauley (Philips); Chris Kelley (Intel); Tim Scott (IBM); Dylan Liddiard (Interdigital); David Schwarz (RIM); Jennifer Golinveaux (Motorola Mobility); Steve Hemminger (Nokia) 17 18 A case management conference was held on July 27, 2012. Trial begins on July 30, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. At the case management conference on July 27, 2012, the following rulings were made orally: 19 20 21 22 JURY INSTRUCTIONS: Apple’s renewed objection to preliminary instruction number 21, regarding trade dress contentions was DENIED, for the reasons stated on the record. PRESS: Only one representative per media outlet will be permitted in the Courtroom for jury selection, opening statements and closing arguments. The rest of the press may observe the proceedings from the overflow courtroom. There will be video and audio of the opening statements and closing arguments in the overflow courtroom. 23 ALL TRIAL LAWYERS must make appearances in this case and must be admitted in this District. 24 25 26 27 28 OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE, EXHIBITS, WITNESSES, and DEPOSITIONS: The parties must file objections and responses by 8:00 a.m. the day before the witnesses testifies. The time from 8:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. is reserved before trial every day to address any objections or otherwise take care of housekeeping matters. SAMSUNG’S MOTION REGARDING REFERENCES AT TRIAL: The parties shall be referred to as “Apple” and “Samsung” during trial. When presenting its affirmative case, a party may also be referred to as “Plaintiff.” When presenting its defensive case, a party may also be referred to as “Defendant.” Samsung’s request to change tables after Apple presents its affirmative case is DENIED. Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK MINUTE ORDER AND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER 1 2 3 4 5 MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM A MAGISTRATE JUDGE ORDER: Apple shall respond to Samsung’s motion for relief from Judge Grewal’s Order by Tuesday, July 31, 2012. Samsung may file a reply by Friday, August 3, 2012. The parties were instructed not to reference the potential adverse inference jury instruction or the sanction related to Samsung’s financial data during opening statements. SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR AN ADVERSE INFERENCE JURY INSTRUCTION: Samsung’s motion for an adverse inference jury instruction, Samsung’s motion to shorten time on its motion for an adverse inference jury instruction, and Apple’s motion to strike Samsung’s motion for an adverse inference jury instruction are referred to Magistrate Judge Grewal for resolution. 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 APPLE’S MOTION TO ENFORCE ORDERS REGARDING SONY DESIGNS: Samsung’s response to Apple’s motion is to be filed July 27, 2012. Apple’s reply is due by July 28, 2012. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO OBJECTIONS TO OPENING STATEMENTS must be filed by 8:00 a.m. on Sunday, July 29, 2012. The parties are limited to presenting their objections in 8 pages of briefing, and their responses in 8 pages of briefing. SEALING MOTIONS: By Monday, July 30, 2012 at 5:00 p.m., the parties may file revised motions to seal, with supporting declarations, in light of the guidance given by the Court at the hearing. Intel, and possibly RIM, IBM, Motorola Mobility, and Philips may also file supplemental declarations in support of the motions to seal by July 30, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. Third Party Intervenor, Reuters America, may respond by Thursday, August 2, 2012. JURY NOTEBOOKS: The parties were unable to agree on the claim constructions that will appear in the jury notebooks. By noon on Saturday, July 28, 2012, the parties shall file a joint chart including each side’s proposal for the disputed claim constructions, with citations to the relevant court orders. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 INFORMATION FOR JURORS: By Monday, July 30, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. the parties shall bring 40 photocopies of the 6 page list of attorneys and witnesses. The parties should also prepare 40 copies of the list of trial dates and times for the jurors. Specifically, the trial dates are July 30, 2012; July 31, 2012; August 3, 2012; August 6, 2012; August 7, 2012; August 10, 2012; August 13, 2012; August 14, 2012; August 15, 2012; August 16, 2012; August 17, 2012; August 20, 2012; and August 21, 2012. The jury may be in deliberations August 22, 2012; August 23, 2012; and August 24, 2012. Additionally, this schedule should be reflected in the jury notebooks at Tab 1, which currently erroneously states that there is no court on August 22, 2012 and August 23, 2012. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 27, 2012 22 _________________________________ LUCY H. KOH United States District Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK MINUTE ORDER AND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?