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

Filing 1511

ORDER Regarding Apple's Objections to Denison Exhibits. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 7/30/2012. (lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/30/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

APPLE, INC., a California corporation,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., A
)
Korean corporation; SAMSUNG
)
ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New York )
corporation; SAMSUNG
)
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, )
a Delaware limited liability company,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
I.

Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER ON APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO
SAMSUNG’S EXHIBITS TO BE USED
DURING THE DIRECT
EXAMINATION OF JUSTIN DENISON

APPLE’S OBECTIONS TO EXHIBITS TO BE USED DURING THE DIRECT
EXAMINATION OF JUSTIN DENISON

20

Apple has filed objections to two of Samsung’s exhibits to be used during the direct

21

examination of Justin Denison. After reviewing the parties’ briefing, considering the record in the

22

case, and balancing the considerations set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 403, the Court rules on

23

Apple’s objections as follows:

24

SAMSUNG
EXHIBIT
NUMBER
DX627

25
26
27
28

COURT’S RULING ON OBJECTION

Sustained. Apple objects that DX627 is only relevant to show that Best Buy
marketed certain products and is therefore inadmissible under Rules 402 and 403.
Samsung contends that DX627 is relevant to show both that Apple’s trade dress
lacks distinctiveness and that Samsung monitors the competitive marketplace in
1

Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER ON APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO EXHIBITS TO BE USED DURING DIRECT EXAMINATION OF
JUSTIN DENISON

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

DX629
DX684

an effort to avoid intellectual property violations. DX627 has very little
probative value for showing that Samsung monitors the competitive marketplace.
Moreover, while DX627 is relevant to show that Apple’s trade dress lacks
distinctiveness, its probative value is substantially outweighed by undue waste of
time. DX627 is 3 large binders full of Best Buy advertisements, most of which
consists of products and intellectual property not at issue in this case.
Sustained. The evidence of Samsung’s advertising is not probative. Moreover,
presenting all of these videos is an undue waste of time.
Overruled. Apple did not raise a Rule1006 objection to Samsung’s opening
statement, therefore the Court did not rule on admissibility under Rule 1006. To
the extent that Apple raises a Rule 1006 objection to exhibit DX684, that motion
is overruled as the underlying evidence is admissible and was presented to Apple.

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 30, 2012

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

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

2
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER ON APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO EXHIBITS TO BE USED DURING DIRECT EXAMINATION OF
JUSTIN DENISON