Wang v. Palo Alto Networks, Inc. et al

Filing 143

ORDER FOLLOWING HEARING ON MARCH 20 AND FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE re 88 Case Management Scheduling Order, CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER: FRE 706 Joint Statement due by noon on 4/3/2014. Dispositive Motions due by 5/15/2014.. Signed by Judge Alsup on March 20, 2014. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/20/2014)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

Plaintiff,

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

No. C 12-05579 WHA

QIANG WANG,

v.
PALO ALTO NETWORKS, NIR ZUK, and
FENGMIN GONG,

ORDER FOLLOWING HEARING ON
MARCH 20 AND FURTHER CASE
MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE

12
Defendants.
/

13
14

The parties appeared for a hearing on March 20. The following schedule was set.
15
1.

FRE 706 EXPERT.

16
From March 6 to March 20, the parties were provided an opportunity to object to the
17
Court appointing a FRE 706 expert. At the hearing on March 20, the parties were again asked
18
whether they had any objections to the appointment of a FRE 706 expert. There was no
19
objection.
20
Accordingly, the parties shall move forward with their efforts to find and agree upon
21
two proposed FRE 706 experts regarding the patent issues in the case. The parties shall jointly
22
call the proposed FRE 706 experts and discuss the case schedule, expected tasks, fees and
23
expenses, and any conflicts. The parties may provide the candidates with a copy of the
24
asserted patents.
25
By NOON ON APRIL 3, the parties shall file a joint statement identifying the two
26
agreed-upon proposed FRE 706 experts. The candidates should be available for an interview
27
and the statement may identify proposed dates. The undersigned judge will then SET A
28
HEARING DATE for the candidates to appear for an interview in open court with both sides
present.

1

2.

MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT.

2

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s trade secret

3

misappropriation claim based on the statute of limitations, noticed for April 17, is hereby re-set

4

for APRIL 10 AT 8:00 A.M. (Dkt. No. 131).

5

Plaintiff currently asserts 27 trade secrets. By NOON ON APRIL 15, plaintiff shall

6

identify and inform defendants in writing of ALL ASSERTED TRADE SECRETS in this action.

7

The asserted trade secrets cannot be withdrawn thereafter and will be read to the jury, unless

8

they are dismissed on summary judgment.

9

The August 2013 first amended case management order set May 15, 2014, as the last

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

day to file dispositive motions (Dkt. No. 88). Plaintiff does not intend to bring any motions for

11

summary judgment. Defendants intend to bring (1) a motion for summary judgment of non-

12

infringement and invalidity and (2) a motion for summary judgment on the merits of the trade

13

secret misappropriation claim. Defendants expect their invalidity expert to opine on three

14

anticipatory references and five obviousness references. Defendants will limit themselves to

15

two prior art references for each asserted trade secret.

16

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on ANY AND ALL PATENT ISSUES, not to

17

exceed 25 pages of briefing and 150 pages of declarations and exhibits (not counting the

18

asserted patents), is due MAY 15, 2014. The opposition must be limited to 25 pages of briefing

19

and 170 pages of declarations and exhibits. The reply must be limited to ten pages of briefing

20

and twenty pages of declarations and exhibits. All briefing and declarations must be

21

double-spaced with number twelve font, with only occasional single-spaced quotes and

22

footnotes. All declarations should be hole-punched with exhibit tabs.

23

It is possible that the Court may set an evidentiary hearing to allow each side to present

24

any diagrams, animations, and cartoons supporting their arguments. One expert from each side

25

may be asked to appear and testify in Court. Whether such a hearing is needed will be decided

26

in due course.

27
28

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the trade secret misappropriation claim,
not to exceed 15 pages of briefing, is due MAY 15, 2014. Defendants shall limit their trade2

1

secret summary judgment motion to TWO TRADE SECRETS. The opposition shall not exceed

2

15 pages of briefing and the reply shall not exceed seven pages of briefing. If the trade-secret

3

motion is granted in full, defendants may ask for leave to file another summary judgment

4

motion. Permission may be sought by filing a five-page application setting forth the ground

5

for the new motion. Any opposition must be filed within three calendar days.

6

All other existing deadlines remain in place, including the July 7, 2014, trial date.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Dated: March 20, 2014.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3