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

Filing 1691

ORDER RE APPLE'S SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTION TO SAMSUNG'S DISCLOSURES IN CONNECTION WITH YOUNGMI KIM RE: 1689. Signed by Judge Lucy Koh on 4/14/2014. (lhklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/14/2014)

Download PDF
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 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION ) ) ) 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, Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK ORDER ON APPLE’S SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTION TO SAMSUNG’S DISCLOSURES IN CONNECTION WITH YOUNGMI KIM Apple has filed a supplemental objection to Samsung’s disclosures in connection with Youngmi Kim. ECF No. 1689. Samsung has filed a response. ECF No. 1688-2. After reviewing the parties’ briefing, considering the record in the case, and balancing the considerations set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 403, the Court rules on Apple’s objection as follows: Exhibit COURT’S RULING ON OBJECTION Number Youngmi Kim    SDX2462 Sustained. (video 1 Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK ORDER ON APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO SAMSUNG’S DISCLOSURES IN CONNECTION WITH YOUNGMI KIM 1 2 3 4 5 6 demonstrative about Android notification center) IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 14, 2014 _________________________________ LUCY H. KOH United States District Judge 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 ON APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO SAMSUNG’S DISCLOSURES IN CONNECTION WITH YOUNGMI KIM

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?