To read comments to this article, go here
| Judge Koh Asks For Lists Proving Compliance with Order Re Attachments ~pj |
 |
|
Wednesday, December 05 2012 @ 04:09 PM EST
|
It seems that Judge Lucy Koh has it in mind to hold the parties to what she told them would be the rules of the road for post-verdict filings in Apple v. Samsung. Her order [PDF] said that they were limited to certain space limits and couldn't work around them via attachments. Specifically, they couldn't present new points in attachments that were not argued in the briefs themselves: Any argument that is not explicitly articulated within the briefing page limits will be disregarded. Any supporting documentation shall be for corroboration purposes solely and shall not be used as a vehicle for circumventing the Court’s page limits. Both parties have accused the other of violating her order. Now, a
new order [PDF] tells them to file a cross-linked list, showing where in the briefs each attachment is referenced. She says both parties have submitted voluminous documents with their briefs, and the new order is to make *them* do the hard work of cross-checking, so she can disregard anything not in the briefs.
Here is the docket entry:
2181 -
Filed & Entered: 12/04/2012
ORDER TO FILE LISTS OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 12/4/2012. (lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/4/2012)
The order:
ORDER TO FILE LISTS OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
In its Order setting the post-trial briefing schedule, the Court advised the parties that: “Any argument that is not explicitly articulated within the briefing page limits will be disregarded. Any supporting documentation shall be for corroboration purposes solely and shall not be used as a vehicle for circumventing the Court’s page limits. Any citations to the record must include the relevant testimony or exhibit language.” ECF No. 1945.
Despite this clear direction, both parties submitted voluminous documents with their post-trial motions. The Court plans to strike from the record all of the material submitted in violation of the Court’s Order.
To facilitate this process, the parties are hereby ORDERED to file, by Friday, December 7, a list of all the supporting documentation submitted with the post-trial motions (JMOL motions, non-jury motions, and injunction/enhancement motion), oppositions, and replies; the ECF number assigned to each document; and identification of the page and line-number of the post-trial briefing that cites each document. IT IS SO ORDERED. Can you hear the groans coming from the lawyers having to work on this? What am I saying? They'll probably make the paralegals do it, with lawyer "supervision". But if they were doing it right, they should have had such a list, at least in mind, when they filed the attachments. They had her order, so presumably they already did such a list, and that should make it easier.
Except if they cheated. Like that would ever happen.
|
|
|
|
