Fox Factory, Inc. v. SRAM, LLC
Filing
41
ORDER granting 40 STIPULATION to Amend the Case Schedule. Deadline to Amend/Add Parties: 7/21/2017. Close of Fact Discovery: 12/20/2017. Dispositive Motion to be heard by 5/30/2018. Tutorial Hearing set for 9/22/2017 09:00 AM and Claims Constr uction Hearing set for 9/29/2017 09:00 AM. Pretrial Conference set for 8/13/2018 02:00 PM and Jury Trial set for 11/5/2018 08:30 AM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William H. Orrick. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 3/22/2017. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/22/2017)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
SHARTSIS FRIESE LLP
ERICK C. HOWARD (Bar #214107)
ehoward@sflaw.com
One Maritime Plaza, Eighteenth Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 421-6500
Facsimile: (415) 421-2922
LEWIS RICE LLC
Richard B. Walsh, Jr.
rwalsh@lewisrice.com
Michael J. Hickey
mhickey@lewisrice.com
Sarah A. Milunski
smilunski@lewisrice.com
Michael H. Durbin
mdurbin@lewisrice.com
600 Washington Avenue, Suite 2500
St. Louis, MO 63101
Telephone: (314) 444-7600
Facsimile: (314) 241-6056
Robert F. McCauley (Bar #162056)
robert.mccauley@finnegan.com
Jeffrey D. Smyth (Bar # 280665)
jeffrey.smyth@finnegan.com
Christopher B. McKinley (Bar #306087)
christopher.mckinley@finnegan.com
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON,
FARABOW, GARRETT &
DUNNER, LLP
3300 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: (650) 849-6600
Facsimile: (650) 849-6666
Attorneys for Plaintiff
FOX FACTORY, INC.
Attorneys for Defendant
SRAM, LLC
13
14
15
16
17
18
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
19
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
20
21
FOX FACTORY, INC.,
22
Plaintiff,
23
Related Case Nos.
3:16-CV-00506-WHO AND
3:16-CV-03716-WHO
v.
24
SRAM, LLC,
25
Defendant.
JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST TO
AMEND THE CASE SCHEDULE;
ORDER
26
27
28
Case Nos. 3:16-CV-03716-WHO
& 3:16-CV-00506-WHO
JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST
AND ORDER
1
To accommodate the schedule of SRAM’s counsel, Plaintiff FOX Factory, Inc. (“FOX
2
Factory”) and Defendant SRAM, LLC (“SRAM”) respectfully stipulate, with the Court’s
3
permission, to continue certain dates in the Court’s case schedule as provided below.
4
In response to the Court’s recent Order denying the parties’ prior proposed amended
5
schedule and directing the parties to further meet and confer (Dkt. 50 in Case 3:16-cv-00506-WHO,
6
at 4), counsel further met and conferred and jointly communicated with Ms. Davis by email
7
regarding scheduling. The net result is that Ms. Davis has advised that the Court is available for
8
tutorial and claim construction hearings on September 22 and 29, 2017, respectively, and these are
9
the first dates offered by the Court that are also available to both parties. To accommodate this
10
proposed change, and mindful of the Court’s requirement that there be at least three months between
11
the dispositive motions hearing date and trial (id.), the parties respectfully propose the amended case
12
schedule below.
13
In view of the proposed continued dates for the tutorial and claim construction hearings, the
14
parties’ proposal would extend various dates by generally corresponding amounts, including the
15
dates for the close of fact discovery and the exchange of expert reports. The parties’ proposal would
16
allow at least three months between the proposed date for hearings on dispositive motions and the
17
first proposed trial date. In light of the proposed revised schedule, the parties also propose that each
18
party have an additional week to file the opposition and reply claim construction briefs, which
19
briefing would be complete more than three months before the proposed tutorial and claim
20
construction hearing dates.
21
More specifically, the parties stipulate and respectfully request that the Court modify the
22
following dates in the case schedule as provided below (all other dates in the Court’s schedule to
23
remain unchanged):
24
25
26
27
28
Event
Deadline to Amend Pleadings
FOX Factory Opening Claim Construction
Brief
SRAM Responsive Brief
FOX Factory Reply Briefs
Tutorial Hearing
Claim Construction Hearing
Current Date
April 21, 2017
April 27, 2017
May 11, 2017
May 18, 2017
June 2, 2017
June 9, 2017
Proposed New Date
July 21, 2017
April 27, 2017
(same)
May 18, 2017
June 1, 2017
September 22, 2017
September 29, 2017
-1Case Nos. 3:16-CV-03716WHO & 3:16-CV-00506-WHO
JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST
AND ORDER
1
2
3
4
5
6
Event
Close of Fact Discovery
Initial Expert Reports (on issues upon which
party bears burden of proof)
Rebuttal Expert Reports
Motion for Consolidation
Close of Expert Discovery
Last Day to File Dispositive Motions
Dispositive Motions heard by
Current Date
September 29, 2017
Proposed New Date
December 20, 2017
October 20, 2017
January 25, 2018
November 20, 2017
November 21, 2017
December 22, 2017
January 22, 2018
February 28, 2018
Pretrial Conference
April 30, 2018
Trial
May 29, 2018 and
June 25, 2018
February 26, 2018
January 31, 2018
March 30, 2018
April 25, 2018
May 30, 2018
August 16, 2018,
subject to the Court’s
availability
September and
October 2018,
approximately one
month apart and
subject to the Court’s
availability
7
8
9
10
11
Respectfully submitted,
12
13
DATED: March 17, 2017
SHARTSIS FRIESE LLP
14
By:
15
16
/s/ Erick C. Howard
Erick C. Howard
Attorneys for Defendant
SRAM, LLC
17
DATED: March 17, 2017
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
18
19
By:
20
21
/s/ Jeffrey D. Smyth
Jeffrey D. Smyth
Attorneys for Plaintiff
FOX Factory, Inc.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2Case Nos. 3:16-CV-03716WHO & 3:16-CV-00506-WHO
JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST
AND ORDER
1
2
ORDER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED, except as modified below:
3
Pretrial Conference
April 30, 2018
Trial
May 29, 2018 and
June 25, 2018
4
5
August 13, 2018
September 10, 2018
and November 5,
2018.
6
7
8
Dated: March 22, 2017
9
_____________________________
The Honorable William H. Orrick
United States District Judge
Northern District of California
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case Nos. 3:16-CV-03716-WHO
& 3:16-CV-00506-WHO
JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST
AND ORDER
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?