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

Filing 1700

ORDER ON APPLE'S OBJECTIONS TO SAMSUNG'S DISCLOSURES RE 1672-3. Signed by Judge Lucy Koh on 4/14/2014. (lhklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/14/2014)

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
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

)
)
)
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 OBJECTIONS TO
SAMSUNG’S DISCLOSURES

Apple has filed objections to Samsung’s disclosures. ECF No. 1672-3. Samsung has filed a
response. ECF No. 1673-3. 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 objections as follows:
Exhibit
Number
Saul
Greenberg
DX 342
(website and

COURT’S RULING ON OBJECTION

Overruled.

1
Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK
ORDER ON APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO SAMSUNG’S DISCLOSURES

1
2
3
4
5

manual for
neonode
reference)
SDX2693
Kevin Jeffay
Kevin Jeffay
“Witness
objection”

6

Sustained.

Sustained. Dr. Jeffay did not disclose any opinion on the plain and ordinary
meaning of “analyzer server” or ““linking actions to the detected structures” in
his expert reports, and conceded in his September 2013 deposition that he has not
provided any such opinion. Accordingly, Dr. Jeffay may not provide any opinion
at trial regarding the plain and ordinary meaning of “analyzer server” or
““linking actions to the detected structures.”

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

Brewster
Kahle
DX 311 (1992
conference
paper
regarding
WAIS)
DX 312 (video
of 1991
presentation of
WAIS)
Ulrich Pfeifer
DX 305
(Summary
exhibit of
excerpts from
emails and
postings by
persons using
freeWAIS-sf)
Martin
Rinard
DX 310 (online
discussion post
of
Applesearch)
Patrick
Gogerty
DX 314
(Windows
Mobile 5
source code)
DX 326
(Microsoft
Smart Client
Architecture &

Overruled if Kahle can authenticate DX 311.

Overruled.

Overruled. The Court will give a limiting instruction that DX 305 is not admitted
for the truth of the matters asserted therein.

Overruled.

Overruled.

Overruled.

2
Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK
ORDER ON APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO SAMSUNG’S DISCLOSURES

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

Design Guide)
Jim Lundberg
DX 320 (SUSE
Linux 10.0
source code)
DX 323
(Novell’s
Evolution 2.4
user guide)
DX 324
(Novell’s
GroupWise 6.5
Administration
Guide)
Walter Wong
DX 318 (Cyrus
IMAP
documentation
and source
code)

Overruled.

Overruled.

Overruled.

Overruled.

Apple also requests to seal various documents. ECF No. 1672-3. Having considered
Apple’s motion, and compelling reasons having been shown, the Court seals the following
documents as follows:
Exhibit
DX 302
(Applesearch
source code)
Source code
file names on
page 59 of
Apple’s
supplemental
objections and
responses to
Samsung’s
interrogatories

COURT’S RULING ON SEALING REQUEST
GRANTED.

DENIED without prejudice. Apple has not provided these objections and
responses on ECF so that the Court may evaluate the sealing request. Apple
should file the responses by 10 p.m. on April 14, 2014.

24
25
26
27

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 14, 2014

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

28
3
Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK
ORDER ON APPLE’S OBJECTIONS TO SAMSUNG’S DISCLOSURES