1

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER RE HIGH PRIORITY OBJECTIONS FOR JANUARY 8, 2019

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER RE HIGH PRIORITY 

OBJECTIONS FOR JANUARY 8, 2019

Re: Dkt. Nos. 1158, 1160

Before the Court are the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) high priority objections 

(“HPO”) and responses, ECF No. 1160, and Qualcomm Inc.’s (“Qualcomm”) HPOs and 

responses, ECF No. 1158, for January 8, 2019, day 3 of the trial. 

In its HPOs, the FTC references arguments made in prior HPOs and transcript designations 

made in the FTC’s attached proposed order. The parties are reminded that their HPO’s should be 

self-contained such that the Court does not need to refer to prior HPOs or to any attachments to

understand the argument or identify what testimony is being challenged.

Moreover, in Qualcomm’s HPO # 2, Qualcomm challenges the admissibility of 5 separate 

exhibits. Although Qualcomm presents its HPO as a sole objection, Qualcomm has in fact filed 5 

separate HPOs to exclude 5 separate exhibits.

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1178 Filed 01/07/19 Page 1 of 3
2

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER RE HIGH PRIORITY OBJECTIONS FOR JANUARY 8, 2019

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

In the parties’ daily joint list of admitted trial exhibits, the parties shall add a column to the 

table to denote which exhibits have been admitted with limitations. For example, the parties shall 

note that exhibits QX9322 and QX0079 may not be offered for the truth of the matter asserted. 

The FTC objects to Qualcomm’s completeness designations without fully identifying 

FTC’s designated deposition testimony. In the future, the parties shall identify the relevant 

deposition designations so that the Court may better consider completeness objections.

Having considered the parties’ briefs, the relevant law, the Federal Rules of Evidence, the 

record in this case, and balancing the factors set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 403, the Court 

rules as follows:

HPO Designation/Document Ruling

FTC HPO # 1 QX9343 OVERRULED. 

FTC HPO # 2 QX9226 OVERRULED. 

FTC HPO # 3 QX9322 OVERRULED, but cannot be 

admitted for the truth of the matter 

asserted.

FTC HPO # 4 QX0079 OVERRULED, but cannot be 

admitted for the truth of the matter 

asserted.

FTC HPO # 5 Mahe, 139:5-140:14; 316:1-4 SUSTAINED. 

Qualcomm HPO # 1 Cho, 13-15, 34, 36, 37, 38(a-d, 

g, h), 46, 47, 50-52, 61, 65, 66, 

86-89, 91, 93, 98-101, 104, 105, 

107, 108

OVERRULED.

Qualcomm HPO # 2 CX6774 pages 005-010, 014-

017, 020-021; CX6813; 

CX6816; CX8117

OVERRULED.

Qualcomm HPO # 2 CX5260; CX6774 pages 001-

004, 011-013, 018-019

SUSTAINED.

Qualcomm HPO # 3 Mahe, 140:15-19; 141:25-

142:20; 142:22-143:2; 200:23-

201:5; 235:10-15; 273:13-17

OVERRULED.

Qualcomm HPO # 4 Madderon, 212:9-23 OVERRULED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1178 Filed 01/07/19 Page 2 of 3
3

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER RE HIGH PRIORITY OBJECTIONS FOR JANUARY 8, 2019

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Dated: January 7, 2019

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1178 Filed 01/07/19 Page 3 of 3