Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. v. O2Micro International Limited

Filing 85

ORDER CONCERNING COURT-APPOINTED EXPERT. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 5/5/09. (scc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/5/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 At the March 3, 2009 case management conference, the Court proposed appointing Dr. Enrico Santi as its expert. At O2 Micro's v. O2 MICRO INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, Defendant. / MONOLITHIC POWER SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff, No. C 08-4567 CW ORDER CONCERNING COURT-APPOINTED EXPERT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

request, the Court permitted it to interview Dr. Santi and to file a memorandum in support of its position that Dr. Santi should not be appointed. O2 Micro filed its memorandum, and MPS filed a

memorandum in response. O2 Micro asserts that there is no need for a Court-appointed expert in this case, and thus objects to the Court appointing anyone as an expert. The Court is well acquainted with the family

of patents at issue in this case, having presided over multiple lawsuits between the same parties over a number years. In the

Court's experience, the questions of infringement and validity of the patents involve particularly esoteric principles of electrical

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

engineering.

In light of the probable difficulty of evaluating the

persuasiveness of expert testimony in this case as lay people, it is the Court's opinion that the jury would benefit from the opinion of a neutral expert. The Federal Circuit upheld the Court's

appointment of an independent expert in related case No. C 04-2000, which involved technical issues similar to those here. Monolithic

Power Sys., Inc. v. O2 Micro Int'l Ltd., 558 F.3d 1341, 1346-48 (Fed. Cir. 2009). O2 Micro objects to the appointment of Dr. Santi as an expert because of his involvement in case No. C 04-2000. O2 Micro also

points to certain contacts between Dr. Santi and agents of MPS as evidence of Dr. Santi's potential bias in favor of MPS. It

requests that, if the Court appoints an expert over its objection, the Court appoint Dr. Seth Sanders, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley. The Court previously considered Dr.

Sanders' credentials and experience and found that he was qualified to serve as an expert in case No. C 04-2000. Although MPS

maintains that it would be appropriate to appoint Dr. Santi, it does not object to Dr. Sanders' appointment. The Court is not

persuaded that Dr. Santi's involvement in the previous case or the contacts between Dr. Santi and MPS agents render him unsuitable for appointment in the present case. Nonetheless, because the parties

agree that Dr. Sanders would be a suitable expert, the Court will appoint Dr. Sanders. The parties shall, within five days of this order, jointly file a proposed order instructing Dr. Sanders as to his duties in connection with this case. They may use the Court's order of March

12, 2007 (Docket No. 800) in Case No. 04-2000 and the Court's order 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

of May 5, 2008 (Docket No. 302) in Fujitsu Ltd. v. Nanya Tech. Corp., No. C 06-6613, as models. The instructions should inform

Dr. Sanders that he will testify after the parties' own experts, and thus will not be required to give a lengthy tutorial on the technology at issue to the jury. The parties are also ordered to

submit within five days a proposed schedule indicating when the parties will provide Dr. Sanders with information, what information will be provided, when Dr. Sanders' expert's report should be due and when the parties will depose him. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

5/5/09

CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge

3