Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Nature of the order

This was an administrative trial order about pending stipulations, briefing for a motion for judgment on partial findings, and requests to seal trial materials. It did not decide the underlying competition dispute.

Stipulations and briefing schedule

The court granted the pending stipulations at Docket Nos. 641 and 682. The clerk was directed to admit the identified exhibits into evidence. Exhibits were generally to be placed in the public box, except for materials involving a potential sealing issue or materials covered by a definitive sealing ruling.

For the motion for judgment on partial findings at Docket No. 707, the court ordered Epic Games’ response filed by Sunday, May 23, 2021, at 12:00 p.m. Pacific time. Apple could file an optional reply by a later deadline, but the provided opinion text cuts off before stating that deadline.

Sealing standard

The court applied the presumption that court records should be available to the public. It explained that sealing may be justified by compelling reasons, including protection of trade secrets or information whose disclosure could harm a party’s competitive position. Because the case concerns business competition, the court said the public should be able to see information relevant to its analysis, while confidential third-party information still required balancing against possible competitive harm.

Sealing rulings

- Spotify USA Inc. (Docket Nos. 649 and 692): The court granted Spotify’s administrative motions to seal portions of specified documents containing highly confidential internal user data, finding that disclosure could competitively harm Spotify. - Apple Inc. (Docket No. 659): The court granted the motion as to all documents except for specified portions of PX-602, PX-608, PX-2176, DX-4800, DX-4094, and DX-4170. For those materials, the court required particular text, pages, categories, titles, or statistics to be unredacted while allowing other specified information to remain sealed. The court also stated that it might cite statistics from DX-4170 in a later merits order. - Epic Games, Inc. (Docket No. 660): The court granted the motion as to all documents except for DX-4800, DX-5549, and DX-5550. The court referred to its ruling on DX-4800 and approved Spotify’s proposed redactions for DX-5549 and DX-5550. - Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC (Docket No. 663): The court granted the motion as to specified limited redactions in several documents, including agreements and emails. It denied the request concerning DX-3094 because portions were already publicly accessible, the document stated a general policy for developers using the PlayStation platform, and the document was relevant to the court’s competition analysis. It also denied the request concerning DX-3433 because the proposed redactions were overbroad, the document was more than three years old, it was relevant to the competition analysis, and portions were publicly accessible. DX-3433 was to be entirely unredacted. Sony was directed to provide revised redacted versions for public use at trial. - Nintendo of America, Inc. (Docket No. 705): The court granted Nintendo’s motion to seal proposed redactions in its specific agreement with Epic Games, finding the redactions narrowly tailored and potential competitive harm greater than the public’s interest in the unredacted agreement. - Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (Docket No. 665): The court granted Samsung’s request to seal DX-4322 in its entirety. The court addressed DX-4800 in the Apple sealing ruling.

The court ordered Docket Nos. 641, 649, 659, 660, 663, 665, 682, 692, and 705 terminated. Judge Rogers signed the order on May 20, 2021.