During this patent infringement action, Apple filed a motion for discovery sanctions based on a failure to produce documents after a remand. The parties apparently had agreed to limited discovery post-remand, but a dispute arose over whether discovery before remand should be supplemented or corrected.
As the district court explained, “[t]he parties’ agreement limiting post-remand discovery did not absolve the parties of their underlying obligation to supply corrective information regarding material that had already been disclosed.” Apparently, Unwired had failed to produce new licenses that would have supplemented its prior production prior to remand.
Because of the failure to produce the licenses, the district court ruled that “Unwired will not be permitted to present evidence about the newly disclosed licenses in its case in chief.” The district court also noted that “[h]owever, subject to any further orders of this Court, Unwired may address the licenses on cross or redirect to the extent Apple has elicited testimony on them, and Unwired may present argument about the licenses in its closing.”
Unwired Planet, LLC v. Apple Inc., Case No. 13-cv-04134 (N.D. Cal. April 15, 2017)
The authors of www.PatentLawyerBlog.com are patent trial lawyers at Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP. For more information about this case, contact Stan Gibson at 310.201.3548 or SGibson@jmbm.com.