Finisar Corporation v. Source Photonics, Inc. et al

Filing 55

CORRECTED SCHEDULING ORDER FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION. Signed by Judge Alsup on May 11, 2010. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/11/2010)

Download PDF
Case3:10-cv-00032-WHA Document51 Case3:10-cv-00032-WHA Document50 Filed05/03/10 Filed04/30/10 Page1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 DANIEL JOHNSON, JR. (State Bar No. 57409) MICHAEL J. LYONS (State Bar No. 202284) HARRY F. DOSCHER (State Bar No. 245969) MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 2 Palo Alto Square 3000 El Camino Real, Suite 700 Palo Alto, CA 94306-2122 Tel: 650.843.4000 Fax: 650.843.4001 E-mail: djjohnson@morganlewis.com E-mail: mlyons@morganlewis.com E-mail: hdoscher@morganlewis.com Attorneys for Plaintiff FINISAR CORPORATION Alan H. Blankenheimer (Bar No. 218713) Laura E. Muschamp (Bar No. 228717) Jo Dale Carothers (Bar No. 228703) COVINGTON & BURLING LLP 9191 Towne Centre Drive, 6th Floor San Diego, CA 92122-1225 Tel: 858-678-1800 Fax: 858-678-1600 E-mail: ablankenheimer@cov.com E-mail: lmuschamp@cov.com E-mail: jcarothers@cov.com Robert T. Haslam (Bar No. 71134) COVINGTON & BURLING LLP 333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 700 Redwood Shores, CA 94065 Tel: 650-632-4700 Fax: 650-632-4800 E-mail: Rhaslam@cov.com Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaimants SOURCE PHOTONICS, INC. ET AL. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION FINISAR CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff and Counterdefendant, Case No. C-10-00032 WHA [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION 19 vs. 20 SOURCE PHOTONICS, INC., ET AL., 21 Defendants and Counterclaimants. 22 23 24 25 26 27 MORGAN, L E W I S & B O C K I U S LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW PALO ALTO Dept.: Courtroom 9, 19th Floor Judge: Hon. William Alsup 28 DB2/21699192.1 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION; (C-10-00032 WHA) P Case3:10-cv-00032-WHA Document51 Case3:10-cv-00032-WHA Document50 Filed05/03/10 Filed04/30/10 Page2 of 4 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 MORGAN, L E W I S & B O C K I U S LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW PALO ALTO Finisar's Proposal Defendants' Proposal Patent L.R. 3-1 Infringement Contentions and Patent L.R. 3-2 Document Production Patent L.R. 3-3 Invalidity Contentions and Patent L.R. 3-4 & 3-7 Document Productions (if 10 or fewer claims have been asserted by a party)1 Patent L.R. 3-3 Invalidity Contentions and Patent L.R. 3-4 & 3-7 Document Productions (if more than 10 claims have been asserted by a party) Patent L.R. 4-1 Exchange of Proposed Terms Patent L.R. 4-2 Exchange of Preliminary Claim Constructions Patent L.R. 4-3 Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement Patent L.R. 4-4 Close of Claim Construction Discovery May 6, 2010 June 18, 2010 June 25, 2010 June 25, 2010 July 9, 2010 July 9, 2010 July 15, 2010 July 30, 2010 August 6, 2010 August 13, 2010 August 20, 2010 Patent L.R. 4-5(a) Opening Claim Construction Brief August 25, 2010 Patent L.R. 4-5(b) Responsive Claim Construction Brief September 8, 2010 Patent L.R. 4-5(c) Reply Claim Construction Brief September 15, 2010 Tutorial September 22, 2010 28 At the April 14, 2010 scheduling conference, the Court stated that if a party were to assert more than 10 claims, it would extend the deadline for submission of invalidity contentions: "If it's more than ten claims, I'm going to give them more time." Tr. at p. 9, lines 11-12. Plaintiff Finisar believes that additional time should be granted if more than 10 independent claims are asserted within a patent family. Defendants interpret the Court's statement to provide that more time will be allowed for invalidity contentions if more than 10 claims are asserted by a party regardless of whether the claims are independent claims or dependent claims and regardless of whether the asserted claims are for one patent family or are spread across multiple patent families. DB2/21699192.1 1 2 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION; (C-10-00032 WHA) P Case3:10-cv-00032-WHA Document50 Case3:10-cv-00032-WHA Document51 Filed04/30/10 Page3 of 4 Filed05/03/10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Claim Construction Hearing October 06, 2010 The Court having considered the schedule above, and upon good cause showing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: That the [Proposed] Order re Schedule for Claim Construction is hereby adopted by the Court. The parties shall comply with this Order. May 3 May 11 Dated: _______, 2010 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 MORGAN, L E W I S & B O C K I U S LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW PALO ALTO ER N F D IS T IC T O R 28 DB2/21699192.1 A C LI FO Judge W illiam A lsup R NIA _________________________________________ HONORABLE WILLIAM H. ALSUP OVED APPRDISTRICT JUDGE UNITED STATES UNIT ED 9 S S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O NO RT 3 H [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION; (C-10-00032 WHA) P

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?