XpertUniverse, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
Filing
218
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 217 Joint Stipulation Regarding Case Schedule AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 2/13/2020. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/13/2020)
1
2
3
4
John M. Desmarais (CA SBN 320875)
Emily H. Chen (CA SBN 302966)
Michael R. Rhodes (CA SBN 319432)
DESMARAIS LLP
101 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: (415) 573-1900
Fax: (415) 573-1901
5
10
Tamir Packin (CA SBN 317249)
Jordan N. Malz (pro hac vice)
Lindsey Miller (pro hac vice)
Wen Xue (pro hac vice)
Ryan T. Lawson (pro hac vice)
DESMARAIS LLP
230 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10169
Tel: (212) 351-3400
Fax: (212) 351-3401
11
Counsel for Defendant Cisco Systems, Inc.
6
7
8
9
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
13
14
XpertUniverse, Inc.,
15
Case No. 03:17-cv-03848-RS
Plaintiff,
16
Hon. Richard Seeborg
v.
17
JOINT SIPULATION REGARDING
CASE SCHEDULE
Cisco Systems, Inc.,
18
Defendant.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING CASE SCHEDULE
Case No. 03:17-cv-03848-RS
1
Defendant Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”) and plaintiff XpertUniverse, Inc. (“XU”), by and
2
through their respective counsel of record, hereby enter into the following joint stipulation regarding
3
the case schedule in this matter:
4
1.
The Court issued a claim construction order on November 25, 2019 (D.I. 183);
5
2.
The Court has not issued a schedule for any case events after claim construction; and
6
3.
The parties have conferred about a post-claim-construction case schedule.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Accordingly, the parties stipulate, subject to the Court’s approval, to the following case
schedule:
Event
Exchange Terms/Custodians/Time-Frames For E-mail
Productions
XU Opposition to Cisco’s Motion to Amend Answer
Exchange Number of Hits For E-mail Requests
Cisco’s Reply for Motion to Amend Answer
Hearing on Cisco’s Motion to Amend Answer
Parties to Substantially Complete E-mail Productions
Close of Fact Discovery
Opening Expert Reports (for party with burden of
proof)
Deadline To Conduct Mediation
Rebuttal Expert Reports
Close of Expert Discovery
Summary Judgment Motions
Summary Judgment Oppositions
Summary Judgment Replies
Hearing on Summary Judgment
Proposed Deadline
February 28, 2020
March 13, 2020
March 16, 2020
April 3, 2020
April 30, 2020 (or a date thereafter
at the Court’s convenience)
May 21, 2020
August 14, 2020
September 10, 2020
September 16, 2020
October 27, 2020
November 19, 2020
December 17, 2020
January 28, 2021
February 25, 2021
March 25, 2021 (or a date thereafter
at the Court’s convenience)
23
24
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING CASE SCHEDULE
1
Case No. 03:17-cv-03848-RS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Dated: February 13, 2020
By: /s/ Tamir Packin
Tamir Packin
By: /s/ Alexander D. Walden
Alexander D. Walden
John M. Desmarais (CA SBN 320875)
Michael R. Rhodes (CA SBN 319432)
Emily H. Chen (CA SBN 302966)
DESMARAIS LLP
101 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: (415) 573-1900
Fax: (415) 573-1901
K. Lee Marshall (CA SBN 277092)
Alexandra C. Whitworth (CA SBN 303046)
BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP
Three Embarcadero Center, 7th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-4078
Telephone: (415) 675-3444
Facsimile: (415) 675-3434
klmarshall@bclplaw.com
alex.whitworth@bclplaw.com
Tamir Packin (CA SBN 317249)
Jordan N. Malz (pro hac vice)
Lindsey Miller (pro hac vice)
Wen Xue (pro hac vice)
Ryan T. Lawson (pro hac vice)
DESMARAIS LLP
230 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10169
Tel: (212) 351-3400
Fax: (212) 351-3401
J. Bennett Clark (pro hac vice)
Daniel A. Crowe (pro hac vice)
BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP
One Metropolitan Square
211 North Broadway, Suite 3600
St. Louis, MO 63102
Telephone: (314) 259-2000
Facsimile: (314) 259-2020
ben.clark@bclplaw.com
dacrowe@bclplaw.com
Counsel for Defendant Cisco Systems, Inc.
18
Joseph J. Richetti (pro hac vice)
Alexander D. Walden (pro hac vice)
BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP
1290 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10104
Telephone: (212) 541-2000
Facsimile: (212) 541-4630
joe.richetti@bclplaw.com
alexander.walden@bclplaw.com
19
Counsel for Plaintiff XpertUniverse, Inc.
15
16
17
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING CASE SCHEDULE
2
Case No. 03:17-cv-03848-RS
1
2
ATTESTATION
Pursuant to L.R. 5-1, I, Michael R. Rhodes, hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of the
3
document has been obtained from each of the other Signatories corresponding to any signatures
4
indicated by a conformed signature (/s/) within this e-filed document.
5
Dated: February 13, 2020
By: /s/ Michael R. Rhodes
Michael R. Rhodes (CA SBN 319432)
Attorney for Defendant Cisco Systems, Inc.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING CASE SCHEDULE
2
Case No. 03:17-cv-03848-RS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
ORDER
Having considered the parties’ joint stipulation regarding a case schedule, the following case
schedule shall apply:
Event
Exchange Terms/Custodians/Time-Frames For E-mail
Productions
XU Opposition to Cisco’s Motion to Amend Answer
Exchange Number of Hits For E-mail Requests
Cisco’s Reply for Motion to Amend Answer
Hearing on Cisco’s Motion to Amend Answer
Parties to Substantially Complete E-mail Productions
Close of Fact Discovery
Opening Expert Reports (for party with burden of
proof)
Deadline To Conduct Mediation
Rebuttal Expert Reports
Close of Expert Discovery
Summary Judgment Motions
Summary Judgment Oppositions
Summary Judgment Replies
Hearing on Summary Judgment
Deadline
February 28, 2020
March 13, 2020
March 16, 2020
April 3, 2020
, 2020
May 21, 2020
August 14, 2020
September 10, 2020
September 16, 2020
October 27, 2020
November 19, 2020
December 17, 2020
January 28, 2021
February 25, 2021
March 25, 2021
17
18
IT IS SO ORDERED.
19
20
DATED:
Honorable Richard G. Seeborg
United States District Judge
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Case No. 03:17-cv-03848-RS
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?