We now have a look into the happenings of the hearing on Apple’s discovery dispute with Psystar. Just a few moments ago, Apple filed a Proposed Order with the Court compelling Psystar’s production of financial records and submission to an additional Rule 30(b)(6) deposition on the topic of the company financials. Here is a copy of the Proposed Order.

As this is a joint document, it gives us an insight as to what the parties have understood to be the Court’s ruling on this issue (to which both parties also agreed).

Here are the rulings in the Proposed Order:

Based on the parties’ agreement and the Court’s resolution of the disputes, the Court now orders that Psystar produce by NOON ON MAY 18, 2009, the following categories of documents:

• All the underlying documents used to prepare the June 2008 profit and loss statement and balance sheet bates stamped PS010327-328, to the extent the documents have not been produced.

• All the underlying documents used or being used to prepare the aggregated financial statement referenced in Psystar’s opposition letter brief (Dkt. No. 61).

• All of the tabulations created by Jennifer Perez regarding the components needed to build Psystar’s products.

• Documents bates stamped PS01383-2000.

• Bank statements for all of Psystar’s accounts from Commerce Bank and TD Bank from April 2008 through September 2008. To the extent that said statements are not immediately in the possession of Psystar either in physical or electronic form, Psystar shall ask Commerce Bank and TD Bank for these statements on an every other day basis until Commerce Bank and TD Bank provide said statements.

• A copy of all attachments to all previously produced emails and a copy of the corresponding email in hard copy or in electronic form.

In addition, Psystar will provide a designated representative to supplement Apple’s previously noticed 30(b)(6) deposition on Topic 2 (financial information) on JUNE 3, 2009, starting at 9 a.m. at the San Francisco office of Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP. This date may be changed to another day during the week of June 3 so long as the Parties agree in writing in advance of the deposition date.

If Psystar does not completely produce the aforementioned financial documents by May 18, 2009, Apple will be allowed to take a deposition after the fact discovery deadline regarding any documents produced after the Court’s deadline of May 18, 2009. Should Psystar fully comply in producing all the financial documents listed above by May 18, Psystar does not have to pay Apple’s attorney’s fees and expenses.

It seems that the Court did not find Psystar’s somewhat petulant response compelling.

A copy of the Proposed Order was uploaded above.

Much thanks to reader Anthony for pointing out an error made in the first sentence, which I have fixed.