Looking at the entire 42 page order signed by Virginia DeMarchi, The original verbiage on these modified orders below was lined through:
Outside attorneys of record for the Parties are hereby authorized to be the
persons who may retrieve confidential exhibits and/or other confidential matters filed with the Court
upon termination of this litigation without further order of this Court, and are the persons to whom
And replaced with this:
[color=red]Materials filed with the Court shall be disposed of in compliance with the normal records disposition policy of the United States Courts. See Civil L.R. 79-5(g).[/color][color=red][/color]
And at the end of the order, this was added to the original orders:
Q. If the parties are unable to resolve any disputes concerning the discovery or disclosure of information designated under this Protective Order, they shall comply with the discovery dispute procedures outlined in Judge DeMarchi's Standing Order for Civil Cases, which requires, among other things, that such disputes be brought by joint discovery letter, rather than by noticed motion. To the extent other provisions of this Protective Order suggest that such matters may be brought by motion, those other provisions are deemed void.
Question - do you have any speculation on why Apple would want to insert this very specific language at this point in time?
Also - Is there any consequence or implied ramifications that Apple made the move to effectively add their new lawsuit, Case 5:20-cv-02460 filed in April asking for declaratory relief from Judge Koh (after the suit was already filed in Waco) to these existing orders/stipulations for the previous related lawsuits? Could that be a move that argues that these suits are all connected and inseparable from each other? Do you see Apple arguing that this move - signed off on, by the original referring Judge serves to combine the cases, in an effort to keep them in NCDA?
