Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corporation

Filing 145

ORDER RE: CASE SCHEDULE re 141 Joint Case Management Statement filed by Synopsys, Inc.. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on 3/10/14. (tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/11/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 David T. Pritikin (Pro Hac Vice) dpritikin@sidley.com SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 1 South Dearborn Street Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 853-7000 Facsimile: (312) 853-7036 George A. Riley (SBN 118304) griley@omm.com Mark E. Miller (SBN 130200) markmiller@omm.com Luann L. Simmons (SBN 203526) lsimmons@omm.com Michael Sapoznikow (SBN 242640) msapoznikow@omm.com Elizabeth Offen-Brown (SBN 279077) eoffenbrown@omm.com O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 984-8700 Facsimile: (415) 984-8701 M. Patricia Thayer (SBN 90818) pthayer@sidley.com Philip W. Woo (SBN 196459) pwoo@sidley.com SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 555 California Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 772-1200 Facsimile: (415) 772-7400 Kristin L. Cleveland (SBN 184639) kristin.cleveland@klarquist.com Salumeh R. Loesch (Pro Hac Vice) salumeh.loesch@klarquist.com Jeffrey S. Love (SBN 195068) jeffrey.love@klarquist.com Andrew M. Mason (Pro Hac Vice) andrew.mason@klarquist.com John D. Vandenberg (Pro Hac Vice) john.vandenberg@klarquist.com KLARQUIST SPARKMAN, LLP 121 S.W. Salmon Street, Suite 1600 Portland, OR 97204 Telephone: (503) 595-5300 Facsimile: (503) 595-5301 I. Neel Chatterjee (SBN 173985) nchatterjee@orrick.com ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP 1000 Marsh Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 Telephone: (650) 614-7400 Facsimile: (650) 614-7401 Attorneys for Plaintiff SYNOPSYS, INC. 15 16 Attorneys for Defendant MENTOR GRAPHICS CORPORATION 17 18 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 20 NORTHERN DISTRICT CALIFORNIA - SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 21 SYNOPSYS, INC., a Delaware Corporation, 22 23 24 25 26 Plaintiff, vs. MENTOR GRAPHICS CORPORATION, an Oregon Corporation, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 3:12-cv-06467-MMC [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CASE SCHEDULE 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CASE SCHEDULE – CASE NO. 3:12-CV-06467-MMC 1 The Court enters the following revised schedule in this case: 2 Description Previous Schedule [Proposed] New Schedule 1 Further Status Conference January 17, 2014 March 7, 2014 (10:30 a.m.) 6 Privilege Logs Due March 31, 2014 June 13, 2014 7 Completion of Non-Expert Discovery May 12, 2014 July 18, 2014 Expert Reports (Party with burden of proof) June 6, 2014 August 15, 2014 Rebuttal Expert Reports June 20, 2014 August 29, 2014 Reply Expert Reports June 27, 2014 September 5, 2014 Completion of Expert Discovery July 18, 2014 September 19, 2014 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 13 Deadline for Daubert Motions 14 Deadline for Dispositive Motions October 3, 2014 July 25, 2014 October 3, 2014 Response to Dispositive Motions and Daubert Motions August 8, 2014 October 17, 2014 Replies to Dispositive Motions and Daubert Motions August 15, 2014 October 24, 2014 Hearing on Dispositive Motions and Daubert Motions 15 August 29, 2014 November 7, 2014 16 17 18 19 20 (Or at Court’s convenience) 21 22 Pretrial Meet and Confer 24 25 26 27 1 28 No later than September 8, 2014 No later than December 1, 2014 File Joint Pretrial Conference Statement, exhibit list and objections, witness list, trial briefs, motions in limine, joint proposed voir dire, joint 23 September 30, 2014 December 19, 2014 18 Dates in bold were set by the Court in its December 23, 2013 order. D.I. 119. 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CASE SCHEDULE – CASE NO. 3:12-CV-06467-MMC proposed jury instructions, and proposed verdict forms 1 2 Pretrial Conference October 14, 2014 January 13, 2015 (10:00 a.m.) 6-day trial beginning Monday, October 27, 2014 6-day trial beginning Monday, January 26, 2015 (9:00 a.m.) 3 4 TRIAL 5 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 10 Dated: March 10, 2014 MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CASE SCHEDULE – CASE NO. 3:12-CV-06467-MMC

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?