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

Filing 1275

Order Vacating February 20, 2014 Hearing; Requesting Settlement Status Update. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 2/18/2014. (lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/18/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ) ) ) Plaintiff and Counterdefendant, ) ) v. ) ) 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 and Counterclaimants. ) ) APPLE, INC., a California corporation, 21 Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK ORDER VACATING FEBRUARY 20, 2014 HEARING; REQUESTING SETTLEMENT STATUS UPDATE Concluding that Samsung’s motion to strike expert testimony based on undisclosed claim 22 constructions, see Dkt. 1138-4, is appropriate for resolution without oral argument, the Court 23 hereby VACATES the hearing scheduled for February 20, 2013, at 1:30 p.m. The Court also 24 VACATES the case management conference scheduled for the same date and time. 25 The Court requests that the parties file a joint report as to the status of the settlement 26 discussions referenced in the parties’ Joint Proposal Regarding Pre-March 2014 Settlement 27 Discussions, filed in Case No. 11-1846 at Dkt. 2914 (Jan. 8, 2014), by Friday, February 21, 28 2014. 1 Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK ORDER VACATING FEBRUARY 20, 2014 HEARING; REQUESTING STATUS UPDATE 1 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 Dated: February 18, 2014 _________________________________ LUCY H. KOH United States District Judge 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 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK ORDER VACATING FEBRUARY 20, 2014 HEARING; REQUESTING STATUS UPDATE

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?