View this article at: http://www.electronista.com/articles/13/01/02/evenly.applied.ruling.redacts.some.post.trial.filings.on.both.sides/
Wednesday, Jan 02, 2013 6:54pm
Judge Koh purges too-long testimonies, orders sales figures
Judge Lucy Koh, overseeing the Apple versus Samsung smartphone patent trials in the US, has tossed some declarations from both companies attached to briefs and other court filings that were "not explicitly articulated within the briefing page limits." In the order striking the declarations, the judge said that "the Court has not relied on any of this documentation in ruling on the parties' post-trial motions," possibly indicating other post-trial orders are expected soon.

Deleted from the post-trial record are a declaration by NYU professor Tulin Erdem, consultant Ramamirtham Sukumar, and Wharton professor Yoram Wind opposing Apple's motion for a permanent sales injunction on Samsung products. Nine paragraphs by designer Sam Lucente supporting Samsung against various Apple motions have also been removed.

Declarations by University of Toronto professor Karan Singh and Apple consultant Terry Musika in support of a Samsung product injunction has been redacted. Potentially most importantly, six paragraphs from Apple Senior Vice President of Worldwide Marketing Phil Schiller has been struck from the court record as well.

Judge Koh has enforced some seemingly draconian limits on both Samsung and Apple before, during, and after the trial. Patent analyst Florian Mueller noted that "she had warned the parties beforehand that she was going to strictly enforce the page limits, and today's order is strict indeed." In striking the evidence, the judge has made it more difficult for Apple and Samsung to use the materials in appeal. Today's order to strike would have to be reversed by the appeals court before any evidence purged can be used.

Additionally, Judge Koh ordered Samsung to reveal sales data it had attempted to keep sealed. "Samsung’s appeal involves pricing information and profit margins," Koh wrote. The exhibit at issue "only lists the number of units sold in each of several recent months." The ruling demands the total number of units of some of Samsung's smartphones sold during specific time periods. The cellphone models and timeframe of the order has never previously been made public.