Thankyou so much for the laymens terms explanation.
This all sounds so complex to my non legal brain, but is 'a request for a pause of the remedies phase while Apple appeals the partial denial of its motion to intervene' classed as a really simple standard legal procedure in the courts?
These types of motions for a stay are analyzed under a four-part test. Apple needs to show that 1) it is likely to succeed in its underlying request, 2) that without a stay it will suffer irreparable harm, 3) that no other party is unduly harmed by a stay, and 4) that the public interest is not disserved by a stay.
The four parts are weighed together, and a strong showing on one part can make up for a weaker showing on another part.
Assuming that Apple can make that showing, yes the standard procedure is to stay the case while Apple appeals. That preserves the status quo, which would be lost to Apple forever even if it ultimately succeeds on appeal if there was no stay (this is the “irreparable harm” part of the test).
This all sounds so complex to my non legal brain, but is 'a request for a pause of the remedies phase while Apple appeals the partial denial of its motion to intervene' classed as a really simple standard legal procedure in the courts?