Rambus Inc. v. International Business Machines Corporation

Filing 60

ORDER GRANTING 59 Stipulation Re: Case Schedule. Claims Construction Hearing set for 9/21/2011 01:30 PM. Tutorial Hearing set for 9/7/2011 01:30 PM in Courtroom 11, 19th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 4/15/11. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/15/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Barbara Clarke McCurdy (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
Naveen Modi (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
Srikala P. Atluri (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P.
901 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

7
8
9
10
11
12

Tina E. Hulse (CA Bar No. 232936)
[e-mail]
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P.
3300 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94304-1203
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Rambus Inc.

13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

17

RAMBUS INC.,

18

CASE NO. C 10-03736 JSW
(Related Case: C 10-04017 JSW)
Plaintiff,
STIPULATION RE: CASE SCHEDULE;

19
20

v.
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES
CORPORATION,

21

SUPPORTING DECLARATION OF TINA
E. HULSE;
[PROPOSED] ORDER

Defendant.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE
CASE SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 10-03736 JSW

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiff Rambus Inc. (“Rambus”) and Defendant

2

International Business Machines Corporation (“IBM”), through their respective counsel of record,

3

respectfully request, and with the Court’s permission, stipulate to a four-week extension of the

4

current case schedule to allow the parties to effectively discuss settlement. More specifically, with

5

the Court’s permission, the parties hereby stipulate that the current schedule set forth in the January

6

18, 2011, Civil Minute Order [Dkt. 50] be modified as follows:

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

EVENT

CURRENT SCHEDULE

PROPOSED DATE

Exchange of Preliminary Claim
Constructions and Extrinsic
Evidence (Patent L.R. 4-2(a),
(b))

April 18, 2011

May 16, 2011

Meet and confer re Joint Claim
Construction and Prehearing
Statement (Patent L.R. 4-2(c))

April 25, 2011

May 23, 2011

Last day to request leave to
designate additional terms for
claims construction JSW
Standing Order ¶ 4

April 29, 2011

May 27, 2011

Joint Claim Construction and
Prehearing Statement (Patent
L.R. 4-3) – Includes Expert
Testimony. Parties must attach
copies of patents, make
available file histories to Court
for each involved patent

May 13, 2011

June 10, 2011

Completion of Claim
Construction Discovery (Patent
L.R. 4-3)

June 13, 2011

July 11, 2011

Rambus Opening Claim
Construction Brief (Patent L.R.
4-5(a)). 25 page limit

June 27, 2011

July 25, 2011

IBM Responsive Claim
Construction Brief (Patent L.R.
4-5(b)). 25 page limit

July 11, 2011

August 8, 2011

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE
CASE SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 10-03736 JSW

1
2
3
4

EVENT
Rambus - Reply Brief and any
evidence directly rebutting the
supporting evidence (Patent
L.R. 4-5(c)). - 15 page limit

CURRENT SCHEDULE

PROPOSED DATE

July 18, 2011

August 15, 2011

Tutorial for the Court

August 9, 2011

September 6, 2011, or any
later date, subject to the
convenience of the Court’s
calendar 9/7/2011 at 1:30pm

Claim Construction
(“Markman”) Hearing (Patent
L.R. 4-6).

August 23, 2011

September 20, 2011, or any
later date, subject to the
convenience of the Court’s
calendar 9/21/2011 at 1:30 pm

5
6
7

Amended Joint Claim
Construction Statement

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

By her signature below, counsel for Plaintiff attests that counsel for Defendant concurs in the
filing of this stipulation.
Respectfully submitted,

16
17

Date: April 14, 2011

FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P.

18
19
20
21
22
23

By:

/s/ Tina E. Hulse
Tina E. Hulse (CA Bar No. 232936)
[e-mail]
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P.
3300 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94304-1203
Telephone:[phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

24
25
26
27
28
2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE
CASE SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 10-03736 JSW

1

Barbara Clarke McCurdy (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
Naveen Modi (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
Srikala P. Atluri (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P.
901 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
Telephone:[phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

2
3
4
5
6
7

Attorneys for Plaintiff,
Rambus Inc.

8
9
Dated: April 14, 2011
10
11
12

By:

/s/ Edward A. Kmett
Edward A. Kmett (SBN: 204374)
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO
650 Town Center Drive, Suite 1600
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

13
14

Attorneys for Defendant,
International Business Machines Corporation

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE
CASE SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 10-03736 JSW

1
2
3

SUPPORTING DECLARATION OF TINA E. HULSE
I, TINA E. HULSE, declare as follows:
1. I am an associate at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, L.L.P., counsel

4

for Plaintiff Rambus Inc. (“Rambus”). I submit this declaration in support of the parties’ Stipulation

5

Regarding Case Schedule. I make this declaration of my own personal knowledge and will

6

competently testify thereto if called upon to do so.

7

2. On January 18, 2011, the Court entered a Civil Minute Order (“Order”) [Dkt. 50]

8

following the initial Case Management Conference. The Order instructed the parties to follow

9

IBM’s proposed claim construction briefing schedule set forth in the January 14, 2011, case

10

management statement [Dkt. 49]. The Order also set the technology tutorial for August 9, 2011, at

11

1:30 p.m. and the Markman Hearing for August 23, 2011, at 1:30 p.m.

12

3. The parties, both the respective corporate representatives and outside counsel, have been

13

actively discussing resolution of this case. Accordingly, the parties have met and conferred and

14

agree that continuing the case schedule for four weeks will facilitate these settlement discussions.

15

4. There have been no previous time modifications of the case schedule set forth in the

16

Order. Otherwise, the only time modification in this case was to change the Case Management

17

Conference from December 3, 2010, to January 14, 2011, to coincide with the hearing on Rambus’s

18

motion to dismiss in related case, International Business Machines Corp. v. Rambus Inc.,

19

No. C 10-04017 JSW. See Dkt. 48.

20
21
22
23

5. The requested modification in the current case schedule will not affect any other pre-trial
deadlines, as the pre-trial schedule has not yet been entered in this case.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is
true and correct, and this declaration was executed this 14th day of April, 2011.

24

/s/ Tina E. Hulse
Tina E. Hulse

25
26
27
28
4

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE
CASE SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 10-03736 JSW

1
2

[PROPOSED] ORDER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

3
4

15
Dated: April __, 2011

5

The Honorable Jeffrey S. White
United States District Judge
Northern District of California

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE
CASE SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 10-03736 JSW