Justia has the complete docket and copies of the pleadings filed as of October 30, 2008 freely available. On October 30, 2008, Apple filed a Case Management Statement and Proposed Case Management Order. I hope I can preemptively stop the myths and misinformation that might be spread over the significance of this filing.
1. There is no significance that this was filed by Apple. The Plaintiff has the responsibility to file this document which is mandatory in Federal Court cases.
2. The purpose of this filing is to let the Court know of certain terms and conditions that have been agreed to by the parties and to suggest certain critical dates. The Court is not bound to accept any of these terms or dates but will take them into consideration in issuing its Case Management Order.
3. The parties have requested a November 2009 trial date and anticipate the trial to last ten days.
Other points of interest include the following:
- The parties have agreed that the standard ten allowed depositions can be increased to fifteen, not including expert depositions.
- Fact discovery cut-off is requested for June 2009. Discovery responses are not filed with the Court, so we should not expect to find out tantalizing bits of information via that route.
- Expert discovery cut-off is requested for August 2009.
- The final date for hearing dispositive motions is requested for September 2009.
Out of all of these dates, I am most interested in the dispositive motion cut-off date. For those who are not familiar with this term, a dispositive motion is one which will adjudicate the case in part or in full prior to trial. A classic example that is filed in nearly every case by both sides are Motions for Summary Judgment. A Motion for Summary Judgment argues that there are certain issues of fact about which there is no dispute and thus the case should be decided in part or in full strictly upon issues of law by the Judge. Cases are very rarely adjudicated through Final Summary Judgment on all issues for the reason I have stated before: Courts hate to remove cases from the hands of the jury and will give every benefit of the doubt to the non-moving party. Partial Summary Judgment Orders, however, are much more common, and I would be surprised if that were not the case in this suit.
Note: I am aware that not all filings are pleadings, but it is common, even if incorrect, for them to be referred to in that manner.