Clearplex Corporation v. Bray Group, et al
Filing
22
AMENDED STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 9/1/2015 ORDERING each party to serve on each other party by 1/8/2016, its proposed terms for claim construction; ORDERING each party to serve on each other party b y 1/29/2016, its proposed claim construction and supporting evidence; ORDERING the parties to file a Joint Claim Construction Statement by 2/5/2016; ORDERING the parties to simultaneously file opening claim construction briefs and supporting evidence by 2/29/2016; ORDERING the parties to file responsive claim construction briefs by 3/14/2016; SETTING a Claim Construction Hearing for 4/11/2016 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. (Michel, G.)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
CLEARPLEX CORPORATION,
8
Plaintiff,
9
10
11
12
No. 2:14-cv-02099-GEB-AC
v.
BRAY GROUP, a/k/a BRAY, a/k/a
THE BRAY GROUP, INC., a/k/a
BRAY GROUP INC.; and ALAN
BRAY,
AMENDED STATUS (PRETRIAL
SCHEDULING) ORDER
Defendants.
13
14
15
Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation and request to
16
“extend and modify [the] dates set forth in . . . this Court’s
17
January 22, 2015 Claim Construction Schedule (Dkt. No. 15) by 90
18
days
19
issues. (Stipulation & Proposed Order to Modify Case Schedule
20
3:18-21, ECF No. 21.)
for
all
deadlines,”
following
amended
status
order
CLAIM CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
21
The parties’ proposed claim construction schedule is
22
23
the
adopted, as modified, as follows:
1.
24
Each
party
shall
serve
on
each
other
party
its
25
proposed terms for claim construction no later than January 8,
26
2016.
27
28
2.
Each
party
shall
serve
on
each
other
party
its
proposed claim construction and supporting evidence no later than
1
1
January 29, 2016.
2
3.
The parties shall file a Joint Claim Construction
3
Statement no later than February 5, 2016, after the parties seek
4
to resolve disputes. Disputed terms, phrases, and clauses shall
5
be designated as disputed. For any disputed term, phrase, or
6
clause,
the
7
phrase,
or
8
construction; and support for each party’s proposed construction
9
side by side. A model format for the construction statement is as
10
follows (or any other substantively similar format that permits
11
the court to compare terms side by side):
joint
statement
clause
(listed
shall
by
list
claim);
each
each
disputed
party’s
term,
proposed
12
13
14
Claim Language (Disputed
term, phrase, or clause
in bold)
Plaintiff’s Proposed
Construction and
Evidence in Support
Each Defendant’s
Proposed Construction
and Evidence in Support
15
16
17
18
4.
The
parties
shall
attach
to
the
Joint
Claim
19
Construction Statement a copy of the patent(s) in dispute. The
20
parties shall also make a complete prosecution history for the
21
patent(s) available to the Court upon request.
22
5.
The
parties
shall
simultaneously
file
opening
23
claim construction briefs and supporting evidence no later than
24
February 29, 2016. Claim construction briefs shall address each
25
disputed term, phrase or clause following the order of the joint
26
statement.
27
28
6.
The
parties
shall
file
responsive
construction briefs no later than March 14, 2016.
2
claim
1
2
7.
A
claim
construction
hearing
is
scheduled
to
commence at 9:00 a.m. on April 11, 2016.
3
FURTHER SCHEDULING
4
Upon issuance of the claim construction ruling, the
5
Court will set a date for the filing of a further joint status
6
report. In that report, the parties must address the following
7
topics:
8
9
a)
construction ruling for immediate appeal to the Federal Circuit;
10
11
Whether either party wishes to certify the claim
b)
The filing of dispositive motions, and timing of
those motions;
12
c)
Anticipated post-claim construction discovery;
13
d)
Any other pretrial matters.
14
IT IS SO ORDERED.
15
Dated:
September 1, 2015
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?