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

Filing 1733

ORDER RE SAMSUNG'S OBJECTIONS TO APPLE'S DISCLOSURES RE 1726-3. Signed by Judge Lucy Koh on 4/19/14. (lhklc5S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/19/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

APPLE, INC., a California corporation,

)
)
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. )
)

Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK
ORDER RE SAMSUNG’S OBJECTIONS
TO APPLE’S DISCLOSURES IN
CONNECTION WITH CHEVALIER,
FREEMAN, FREEMAN, HONG,
MAZUR, MILLET, PARULSKI, RAO,
SCHONFELD, AND STORER

On April 19, 2014, Samsung filed objections to Apple’s disclosures. ECF No. 1726-3. On
April 19, 2014, Apple filed a response. ECF No. 1727-3. 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 Samsung’s objections as follows:
SAMSUNG OBJECTION
A. Judith Chevalier
Analysis Group Website
Pages
Expert Reports and
testimony of Dr. Teece in

COURT’S RULING ON OBJECTION
Overruled. The document may be used solely for refreshing
recollection and will not be admitted as an exhibit.
Overruled. The document may be used solely for refreshing
recollection and will not be admitted as an exhibit.
1

Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK
ORDER RE SAMSUNG’S OBJECTIONS TO APPLE’S DISCLOSURES IN CONNECTION WITH CHEVALIER,
FREEMAN, FREEMAN, HONG, MAZUR, MILLET, PARULSKI, RAO, SCHONFELD, AND STORER

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

the 1846 case
Preliminary Jury
Instructions
B. Mitchael Freeman
PX254
C. Michael Freeman
PX251
Robert Evatt Article
E. JP Hong
Depo Tr. at 74:15-22
F. Tracey Mazur
PX248
G. Tim Millet
PX257
PX294/298
H. Ken Parulski
Kearl Expert Report and
Depo Transcript
Schonfeld Expert Report
I. Sanjay Rao
Rao Article
J. Dan Schonfeld
Slide 15
Order at Dkt. 1301
K. James Storer
PX249/253
Opening Demonstrative No.
56

Sustained.
Overruled.
Overruled.
Overruled. The document may be used solely for refreshing
recollection and will not be admitted as an exhibit.
Overruled.
Overruled.
Overruled.
Overruled.
Overruled. The documents will not be admitted as exhibits.
Sustained.
Sustained.
Sustained.
Sustained.
Overruled.
Overruled.

16
IT IS SO ORDERED.
17
Dated: April 19, 2014

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK
ORDER RE SAMSUNG’S OBJECTIONS TO APPLE’S DISCLOSURES IN CONNECTION WITH CHEVALIER,
FREEMAN, FREEMAN, HONG, MAZUR, MILLET, PARULSKI, RAO, SCHONFELD, AND STORER