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)

Download PDF
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and inform defendants in writing of ALL ASSERTED TRADE SECRETS in this action. 7 The asserted trade secrets cannot be withdrawn thereafter and will be read to the jury, unless 8 they are dismissed on summary judgment. 9 The August 2013 first amended case management order set May 15,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

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?