Apple, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. et al

Filing 101

ORDER granting 99 Motion regarding technical tutorial. Each side may submit a technical tutorial regarding the technology relevant to its claim construction disputes by 7/15/2011. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 6/28/2011. (voc)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - APPLE, INC. and NeXT SOFTWARE, INC.,
f/k/a NeXT COMPUTER, INC.,
Plaintiffs,

ORDER
10-cv-662-bbc

v.
MOTOROLA, INC. and
MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.,
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This patent infringement case is scheduled for a claim construction hearing on July
22, 2011. Plaintiffs Apple, Inc. and NeXT Software, Inc. have filed a motion with the court
asking permission to submit with their responsive claim construction brief a technical
tutorial that will provide explanation regarding some of the more complicated technologies
implicated by the claim construction disputes. The proposed tutorial would be in the form
of a presentation on a DVD. In response, defendants Motorola, Inc. and Motorola Mobility,
Inc. state that a technical tutorial is unnecessary because the parties can make presentations
regarding the relevant technology at the hearing.
Because there are multiple patents and complex technologies implicated by the
parties’ claim construction disputes, a technical tutorial may be helpful and allow the parties

1

to focus their hearing presentations on the disputed claim terms rather than the underlying
technology. Therefore, I will grant plaintiffs’ request. Each side may submit a technical
tutorial that is no more than one hour. Also, the parties may make brief presentations on
the relevant technology to the court during the course of the hearing if they wish to do so.
I note that the tutorials will be of limited use to the court if the parties present
substantially different descriptions of the relevant technology or use the tutorials to further
their arguments about infringement or invalidity. Thus, the tutorials should focus on the
underlying technology only and should not be directed to the parties’ disputes regarding
limitations in the claim terms. I do not want the submission of the tutorials to present an
opportunity for the parties to argue about their content; if the parties view it in that light,
I will simply reject the submissions without viewing them. To the extent that the parties
have minor and limited objections to the other side’s tutorial, they may address those
objections at the July 22 hearing.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that each side may submit a technical tutorial regarding the
technology relevant to its claim construction disputes. The tutorial can be no longer than

2

one hour and must be submitted by July 15, 2011. The parties may also present information
on the relevant technology at the hearing scheduled for July 22, 2011.
Entered this 28th day of June, 2011.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
BARBARA B. CRABB
District Judge

3