Illumina Inc. et al v. Complete Genomics Inc.

Filing 91

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE PAGE LIMITS FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING. Signed by Judge Elizabeth D Laporte on 10/21/2011. (kns, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/21/2011)

1
2
3
4
5

Kevin M. Flowers (admitted pro hac vice)
John R. Labbé (admitted pro hac vice)
MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP
233 South Wacker Drive
6300 Willis Tower
Chicago, Illinois 60606-6357
[phone] (telephone)
[phone] (facsimile)
E-Mail: [e-mail]
E-Mail: [e-mail]

6
7
8
9

Gina A. Bibby
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
975 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
[phone]
[phone] (facsimile)
E-Mail: [e-mail]

10
11

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
ILLUMINA, INC. and SOLEXA, INC.

12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

13
14
15
16

ILLUMINA, INC. and SOLEXA, INC.,
Plaintiffs,

17
18
19
20

v.
COMPLETE GENOMICS, INC.
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 3:10-cv-05542 EDL
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS
FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
BRIEFING

21
22

Plaintiffs Illumina, Inc. and Solexa, Inc. (collectively, “Illumina”) and Defendant

23

Complete Genomics, Inc. (“CGI”) agree to the following Stipulation and respectfully request that

24

the Court enter an Order as follows:

25

WHEREAS on May 16, 2011, the Court entered a Case Management Scheduling Order in

26

which the Court requested that the parties “provide an estimate of how many pages are needed to

27

brief the dispute” in their Patent L.R. 4-3 Joint Claim Construction and Pre-Hearing Statement

28

(Dkt. No. 76 ¶ 2(e));
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING
CASE NO. 3:10-CV-05542 EDL

1

WHEREAS on September 20, 2011, the parties filed their Joint Claim Construction and

2

Prehearing Statement in which they indicated that “Illumina estimates that twenty-five (25) pages

3

for its opening brief, and ten (10) pages for its reply, are needed for claim construction briefing,”

4

and “CGI estimates it needs thirty-five (35) pages for its responsive brief” (Dkt. No. 87 at 2);

5

WHEREAS Illumina has found that it may require up to thirty (30) pages in its opening

6

claim construction brief to fully address the ten disputed claim terms identified for construction in

7

the Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement;

8
9
10
11
12

WHEREAS the parties agree that subject to the approval of the Court, Illumina’s opening
claim construction brief should be limited to thirty (30) pages, CGI’s responsive brief should be
limited to forty (40) pages, and Illumina’s reply brief should be limited to ten (10) pages;
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the Court, that
the page limits for claim construction briefs will be set as follows:

13

Brief

Page Limit

14

Illumina’s Opening Claim Construction Brief

30 pages

15

CGI’s Responsive Claim Construction Brief

40 pages

16

Illumina’s Reply Claim Construction Brief

10 pages

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING
CASE NO. 3:10-CV-05542 EDL

1

Dated: October 20, 2011

2

/s/ Katherine LaBarre
Michael J. Malecek (State Bar No. 171034)
Email: [e-mail]
Katherine LaBarre (State Bar No. 269726)
Email: [e-mail]
KAYE SCHOLER LLP
Two Palo Alto Square, Suite 400
3000 El Camino Real
Palo Alto, California 94306-2112
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

/s/ John R. Labbé
Kevin M. Flowers (admitted pro hac vice)
Email: [e-mail]
John R. Labbé (admitted pro hac vice)
Email: [e-mail]
MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP
233 South Wacker Drive
6300 Willis Tower
Chicago, Illinois 60606-6357
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant
COMPLETE GENOMICS, INC.

Gina A. Bibby
Email: [e-mail]
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
975 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
ILLUMINA, INC. and SOLEXA, INC.
FILER’S ATTESTATION: Pursuant to General Order
No. 45, Section X.B, John R. Labbé hereby attests that
Katherine LaBarre has provided her concurrence with the
electronic filing of this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order.

16
17

21st
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED, this ______ day of October, 2011.

18
_______________________________
Honorable Elizabeth D. Laporte
United States Magistrate Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING
CASE NO. 3:10-CV-05542 EDL