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

Filing 1540

Order on Samsung's Objections to Apple's Opening Slides (Corrected). Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 03/28/2014. (lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/28/2014)

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
21

)
)
)
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,

I.

Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK
ORDER ON SAMSUNG’S
OBJECTIONS TO APPLE’S OPENING
SLIDES

SAMSUNG’S OBJECTIONS TO APPLE’S OPENING SLIDES

22

Samsung has filed objections to Apple’s Opening Slides and exhibits to be used during

23

Samsung’s Opening Statement. ECF No. 1516-3. Apple has filed a response. ECF No. 1517-3.

24

After reviewing the parties’ briefing, considering the record in the case, and balancing the

25

considerations set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 403, the Court rules on Samsung’s objections

26

as follows:

27
28
1
Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK
ORDER ON SAMSUNG’S OBJECTIONS TO APPLE’S OPENING SLIDES

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

SAMSUNG’S
OBJECTION
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
N.1
N.2

COURT’S RULING ON OBJECTION
Overruled.
Overruled.
Overruled.
Overruled.
Sustained as to Slide 47. Overruled as to remainder.
Overruled. Apple will remove reference to the ’849 and ’721 Patents as stated in
Apple’s response to Samsung’s objection.
Overruled.
Sustained.
Overruled
Overruled as to Slide 33. Sustained as to all other slides.
Overruled.

The Court notes that Samsung’s objections were hard to follow because Samsung lumps a
multitude of exhibits together out of sequential order. Further, Apple’s responses are not organized
the same way as Samsung’s objections. In the future, the responder should conform its organization
to the organization of the objector. The parties shall meet and confer regarding the organization of
Samsung’s objections.
This order addresses only Samsung’s objection to Apple’s opening demonstratives. The
Court will issue a separate order on Samsung’s objections to Apple’s exhibits.

16
17
18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 28, 2014

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK
ORDER ON SAMSUNG’S OBJECTIONS TO APPLE’S OPENING SLIDES