Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Background

This trial order addressed multiple administrative matters in the bench trial between Epic Games, Inc. and Apple Inc. The court emphasized the strong presumption that court records should be publicly accessible, while recognizing that specific factual findings may justify sealing confidential information, trade secrets, or information whose disclosure could cause competitive harm. The court also considered the relevance of third-party information to resolving the dispute transparently.

Apple’s Adverse-Credibility Motion

Apple moved for an adverse credibility finding concerning Lori Wright, a Microsoft Corporation witness. Because Microsoft intended to respond, the court set May 17, 2021, as the deadline for Microsoft and Epic Games to file responses and May 24, 2021, as Apple’s reply deadline. The court stated that it would decide the motion on the papers. The order did not decide the motion.

Sealing Requests

- Apple’s PX-314 request: The court approved Apple’s proposed redactions, finding them narrowly tailored to protect sensitive and confidential information whose disclosure could cause competitive harm to Apple. - Roblox Inc.’s request: The court granted Roblox’s motion to seal Figure 5 from Apple expert Lorin Hitt’s written direct testimony, noting that the court had already granted sealing for that figure. - Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC’s request: The court denied without prejudice the request concerning documents that had already been widely disclosed to the public. Sony could submit a renewed motion for any identified documents that had not yet been disclosed. The court granted sealing for the first and second bullet points of paragraph 114 of Hitt’s written testimony because they contained confidential negotiated terms. The remainder of paragraphs 114 and 115 was to be unredacted, and sealing was denied for paragraph 163 because its information was already public. Figure 4 remained sealed under prior orders concerning multiple parties’ confidential information. - Epic Games’ and Apple’s requests: The court had denied these requests without prejudice on the record on May 7, 2021. It directed the parties to file new administrative motions by specified deadlines for admitted exhibits for which they sought sealing in whole or in part. - Nintendo of America Inc.’s requests: The court granted Nintendo’s request to seal DX-4365, specified financial amounts in DX-4485, and specified Switch-related financial amounts in PX-2456. It ordered the identified page of PX-2442 unsealed because it was highly relevant to platform overlap concerning Fortnite. The court deferred consideration of the specific Epic-Nintendo agreement, DX-3464, until its use at trial and directed Nintendo or Epic to submit a comparison with the generic agreement. The court denied Nintendo’s motion for reconsideration concerning portions of Joe Kreiner’s deposition designation, finding that the information had already been discussed publicly and concerned gameplay mechanics apparent from playing Fortnite. - Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.’s transcript: The court ordered specific portions of the May 3, 2021 trial transcript sealed. It denied all other proposed redactions and ordered the remainder unsealed. - PayPal Inc.’s request: The court granted PayPal’s request to seal PX-2451, finding the proposed redactions narrowly tailored to information whose disclosure could cause competitive harm. - Spotify USA Inc.’s request: The court granted Spotify’s request to seal proposed redactions in documents bearing bates numbers SPOT-EPIC-00000932 through SPOT-EPIC-00000943. The court stated that it would not seal the courtroom if only general references, without specific numbers, were made during trial.

Stipulations and Related-Case Access

The court granted the pending stipulations at Docket Nos. 519, 629, 635, and 637. These stipulations addressed when expert testimony and rebuttal reports would be formally admitted and posted publicly, admission of exhibits attached to identified deposition-designation testimony, treatment of exhibits with possible sealing issues, and admission of DX-5552 concerning categories in the Apple App Store.

The court permitted counsel in the related cases In re Apple Antitrust Litigation, No. 4:11-cv-6714-YGR, and Cameron v. Apple Inc., No. 4:19-cv-3074, to access sealed documents and sealed transcripts in this action because those lawyers had agreed to the stipulated protective orders in this case.

Disposition

The order terminated Docket Numbers 519, 573, 576, 577, 596, 610, 615, 624, 625, 627, 629, 635, 637, and 638. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers issued the order on May 12, 2021.