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

Filing 1801

ORDER RE FURTHER BRIEFING RELATED TO ACCUSED DEVICES. Signed by Judge Lucy Koh on 4/25/14. (lhklc5S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2014)

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

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. )
)

23
24

and subversions as well as JX subparts for each product accused of infringing each asserted patent.
The Court has identified the following remaining discrepancies between the parties’ positions:
•

27
28

Regarding the ’721 patent and the Galaxy Nexus (JX29/72), Apple indicates that JX29G is
not accused (ECF No. 1793-4 at 2), but Samsung disagrees (ECF No. 1785-6 at 5).

25
26

ORDER RE: FURTHER BRIEFING
RELATED TO ACCUSED DEVICES

The Court has reviewed the parties’ submissions regarding the operating system versions

21
22

Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK

•

Regarding the ’414 patent and the Galaxy Tab II 10.1 (JX36), Samsung indicates that
JX36E is accused (ECF No. 1785-6 at 4), but Apple has not identified it as an accused
device (ECF No. 1793-4 at 10).
1

Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHK
ORDER RE: FURTHER BRIEFING RELATED TO ACCUSED DEVICES

1

•

2
3

Regarding the ’959 patent and the Stratosphere (JX37), Apple indicates that JX37B is not
accused (ECF No. 1793-4 at 11), but Samsung disagrees (ECF No. 1785-6 at 3).

•

Regarding the Galaxy S III (JX35), the parties appear to agree on the JX subparts that are

4

accused of infringing the ’647, ’959, and ’414 patents, but JX35M does not appear on

5

Apple’s list of accused devices (ECF No. 1793-4 at 9). Additionally, the descriptions of

6

JX35J and JX35M on the parties’ most recent joint exhibit list are identical. ECF No.

7

1781-1 at 6 (“Physical Exhibit: Galaxy S III SGH‐T999 Android OS 4.1.1”).

8

The parties are hereby ORDERED to submit one-page statements addressing these discrepancies

9

by 11:00 A.M. on April 25, 2014.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11

Dated: April 25, 2014

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

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 RE: FURTHER BRIEFING RELATED TO ACCUSED DEVICES