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

Filing 1519

ORDER Regarding Apple's Objections to Stringer Exhibits. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 7/31/2012. (lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/31/2012)

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

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.
)
)
)

Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER ON APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO
TRIAL EXHIBITS OF CHRISTOPHER
STRINGER

18
19
20

I.

APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO SAMSUNG’ S PROPOSED CROSS
EXAMINATION EXHIBITS FOR CHRISTOPHER STRINGER
Apple has filed objections to many of Samsung’s exhibits to be used during the cross

21
examination of Christopher Stringer. After reviewing the parties’ briefing, considering the record
22
in the case, and balancing the considerations set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 403, the Court
23
rules on Apple’s objections as follows:
24
25
26
27
28

SAMSUNG
EXHIBIT
NUMBER
DX0504

COURT’S RULING ON OBJECTION

Sustained. Judge Grewal’s order excluded the D’037 based on untimely
disclosed invalidity theories. This document cannot be admitted to impeach
Christopher Stringer without being used for the purposes which were barred
by Judge Grewal.
1

Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER ON SAMSUNG’S OBECTIONS TO TRIAL EXHIBITS OF CHRISTOPHER STRINGER

1

DX0511

2
3

DX0562

4

DX0623

5
6
7

DX0624

8
9

DX0628

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

DX0649

12
13

DX0678

14
15

DX0690

16
17
DX0691
18
19
20

DX0708
DX0740

21
22
23

DX0741
DX0743

24
25
26

JX1040

27
28

APL-ITC796-

Overruled. The Court will reserve ruling until the Court learns how Samsung
intends to use the document. The Federal Circuit found this reference was
not anticipatory, but did not rule on whether this reference can be a primary
reference for obviousness.
Overruled. The Howarth e-mail and the photo were not stricken by Judge
Grewal and are admissible to show functionality.
Sustained. Judge Grewal struck Samsung’s theory of invalidity based on the
Sony style designs, as well as Samsung’s theory regarding Sony’s influence
on the Apple design. This document cannot be admitted to impeach
Christopher Stringer without being used for the purposes which were barred
by Judge Grewal.
Sustained. Samsung has not established that it disclosed DX624 in a timely
manner. The only date provided is the April 25, 2012 Deposition of
Christopher Mount.
Sustained. Samsung has not established that it disclosed DX628 in a timely
manner. The only date provided is the April 27, 2012 Deposition of Russell
Winer.
Sustained. Judge Grewal struck Samsung’s theory of invalidity, as well as its
theory regarding Sony’s influence of the Apple design. This document
cannot be admitted to impeach Christopher Stringer without being used for
the purposes which were barred by Judge Grewal.
Sustained. Judge Grewal’s order excluded the D’678 based on untimely
disclosed invalidity theories. The ’504 Application cannot be admitted to
impeach Christopher Stringer without being used for purposes which were
barred by Judge Grewal.
Sustained. Judge Grewal struck Samsung’s theory of invalidity, as well as its
theory regarding Sony’s influence of the Apple design. This document
cannot be used to impeach Christopher Stringer without being used for the
purposes which were barred by Judge Grewal.
Overruled. Samsung may be able to lay a foundation during crossexamination. This is an admission of a party opponent.
Overruled. Samsung may be able to lay a foundation during crossexamination.
Overruled. Judge Grewal’s order excluded the 035 prototype to establish
invalidity of the D’677 patent because the theory of invalidity was not timely
disclosed. The 035 proto may be used for impeachment purposes and noninfringement purposes. However, it is only admissible for impeachment and
non-infringement and may not be used to argue invalidity.
Overruled for the same reasons with respect to the DX0740.
Sustained. This is a subsequently filed design patent application. This
document was precluded pursuant to Apple’s motion in limine #2. Moreover,
this document cannot be used without likely causing undue confusion for the
jury and wasting time.
Overruled. This exhibit is the D’889 Patent and is entirely appropriate for
use on cross-examination of one of the named inventors. However, pursuant
to Judge Grewal’s Order, this evidence may not be used to establish
invalidity of the D’677 Patent. Apple shall prepare a limiting instruction.
Sustained. This is a subsequently filed design patent application. This
2

Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER ON SAMSUNG’S OBECTIONS TO TRIAL EXHIBITS OF CHRISTOPHER STRINGER

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

00000360

APL-ITC796900000442
Apple’s Discovery
Responses
ITC 796 Witness
Statement of Chris
Stringer
ITC Day 1 Hearing
Transcript
ITC Exhibit RX1894C

9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Depositions of
Christopher
Stringer
Ex. 34 to the
2/15/2012 ITC
Dep. of
Christopher
Stringer
5/2/2012
Deposition of Shin
Nishibori

17
18

document was precluded pursuant to Apple’s motion in limine #2. Moreover,
this document cannot be used without likely causing undue confusion for the
jury and wasting time.
The Court will reserve ruling on this exhibit until the Court sees the exhibit.
Overruled. Apple’s interrogatory responses are admissible for impeachment
purposes.
Overruled. Mr. Stringer’s prior sworn testimony is admissible for
impeachment purposes.
Overruled. Mr. Stringer’s prior sworn testimony is admissible for
impeachment purposes.
Sustained. Judge Grewal struck Samsung’s theory of invalidity, as well as its
theory regarding Sony’s influence on the Apple design. This document
cannot be used to impeach Christopher Stringer without being used for the
purposes which were barred by Judge Grewal.
Overruled. Mr. Stringer’s prior sworn testimony is admissible for
impeachment purposes.
Overruled. This evidence is relevant to infringement and invalidity and may
be used for impeachment purposes.

Sustained in part, overruled in part. Judge Grewal struck Samsung’s theory
of invalidity based on the Sony style designs, as well as Samsung’s theory
regarding Sony’s influence of the Apple design. Mr. Nishibori’s testimony
cannot be admitted to impeach Christopher Stringer without being used for
the purposes which were barred by Judge Grewal. The only exception to this
ruling is to the extent that Mr. Nishibori’s testimony may be used to prove
functionality or rebut allegations of non-functionality of the design patents.

19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20

Dated: July 30, 2012

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER ON SAMSUNG’S OBECTIONS TO TRIAL EXHIBITS OF CHRISTOPHER STRINGER