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

Filing 985

OPPOSITION to ( #922 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Samsung's Motion for Clarification Regarding the COurt's May 4, 2012 Order ) filed by Apple Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Jacobs, Michael) (Filed on 5/29/2012) Modified text on 5/30/2012 (dhm, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12
13

APPLE INC., a California corporation,
Plaintiff,

14
15
16
17
18
19

v.

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING
SAMSUNG’S MOTION FOR
CLARIFICATION REGARDING THE
COURT’S MAY 4, 2012 ORDER

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a
Korean corporation; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
AMERICA, INC., a New York corporation; and
SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS
AMERICA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company,
Defendants.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING SAMSUNG’S MOT. FOR CLARIFICATION RE: MAY 4, 2012 ORDER
CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK (PSG)
sf-3152080

1

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

2

Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) seek an order amending

3

the Court’s May 4, 2012 Order to allow Samsung to: (1) use at trial for purposes of showing its

4

design-around efforts certain source code for its “blue glow” functionality which it now claims it

5

produced before December 31, 2011; and (2) use at trial non-source code evidence of its alleged

6

design-arounds to the ’381 and ’163 Apple Patents.

7

Having considered the arguments of the parties and the papers submitted, IT IS

8

ORDERED that Samsung’s Motion for Clarification Regarding the Court’s May 4, 2012 Order is

9

DENIED.

10
11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
HONORABLE PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING SAMSUNG’S MOT. FOR CLARIFICATION RE: MAY 4, 2012 ORDER
CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK
sf-3152080

1