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

Filing 2191

ORDER by Judge Lucy H. Koh denying 2183 Administrative Motion for Leave to File (lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/11/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
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 DENYING LEAVE TO FILE
SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION

On December 4, 2012 – two days before the Court’s scheduled hearing on post-trial

19

motions in this case – Samsung filed an administrative request for leave to file a supplemental

20

declaration of Stephen Gray in support of Samsung’s opposition to Apple’s motion for a permanent

21

injunction (“Request”). ECF No. 2183-1. Apple has opposed this request. ECF No. 2187-2.

22

Samsung contends that the “Supplemental Gray Declaration rebuts Apple’s new allegations and is

23

relevant to Apple’s pending request for a permanent injunction.” Request. at 1. By its very nature,

24

this request necessarily seeks to introduce substantive arguments not addressed in Samsung’s

25

briefing, within the page limits established by this Court’s Order Regarding Post-Trial Proceedings

26

(“Post-Trial Order”). See ECF No. 1945. In the Post-Trial Order, this Court clearly explained that

27

“[a]ny argument that is not explicitly articulated within the briefing page limits will be

28

disregarded.” Id. at 1. Thus, Samsung may not make new arguments in a filing that is submitted
1
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION

1

significantly after briefing has closed. Accordingly, Samsung’s request for leave to file is

2

DENIED.

3

In addition, Samsung has filed a motion to file the Supplemental Gray Declaration and its

4

supporting exhibits under seal. ECF No. 2183. Because the Court has ruled that the declaration

5

may not be filed at all, the request to file it and its supporting exhibits under seal is DENIED as

6

moot.

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

Dated: December 11, 2012

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
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 DENYING LEAVE TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION