AT&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. et al v. TiVo, Inc.

Filing 38

AMENDED STIPULATION AND ORDER. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 7/20/10. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/21/2010) Modified on 7/22/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
AT&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. et al v. TiVo, Inc. Doc. 38 Case4:10-cv-01059-SBA Document37 Filed07/08/10 Page1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 v. AT&T INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY I, L.P. and AT&T INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY II, L.P., Counterclaim Defendants. Case No. 4:10-CV-01059-SBA STIPULATION RE: SCHEDULING ORDER Dockets.Justia.com BAKER BOTTS L.L.P. Bryant C. Boren Jr. (SBN 260602) Kevin E. Cadwell (SBN 255794) 620 Hansen Way Palo Alto, CA 94304 Telephone: (650) 739-7500 Facsimile : (650) 739-7699 Email: bryant.c.boren@bakerbotts.com Email: kevin.cadwell@bakerbotts.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counterclaim Defendants AT&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. and AT&T Intellectual Property II, L.P. IRELL & MANELLA LLP Morgan Chu (SBN 70446) Perry M. Goldberg (SBN 168976) Andrei Iancu (SBN 184973) 1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900 Los Angeles, CA 90067-4276 Telephone: (310) 277-1010 Facsimile: (310) 203-7199 Email: mchu@irell.com Email: pgoldberg@irell.com Email: aiancu@irell.com Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff TiVo Inc. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION AT&T INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY I, L.P. and AT&T INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY II, L.P., Plaintiffs, v. TIVO INC., Defendant. Case No. 4:10-CV-01059-SBA TIVO INC., Counterclaim Plaintiff, AMENDED STIPULATION CONCERNING THE COURT'S CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER Case4:10-cv-01059-SBA Document37 Filed07/08/10 Page2 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 I. CORRECTIONS TO THE CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER ARE CORRECT AND APPROPRIATE On June 24, 2010, the Court held an initial case management conference in the abovecaptioned case. The Court set a claim construction schedule based on the Local Patent Rules for the Northern District of California. Among the dates set by the Court were the following: Event Dates Set By Court at Case Management Conference July 8, 2010 Infringement Contentions (Patent L.R. 3-1) due Invalidity Contentions (Patent L.R. 3-3) due Proposed Terms for Construction (Patent L.R. 4-1) due Preliminary Claim Constructions (Patent L.R. 4-2) due Joint Claim Construction and expert reports regarding claim construction due (Patent L.R. 43) August 23, 2010 September 7, 2010 September 27, 2010 October 22, 2010 On July 1, 2010, the Court issued a Case Management Scheduling Order. Docket No. 34. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. 4:10-CV-01059-SBA STIPULATION RE: SCHEDULING ORDER However, the Case Management Scheduling Order sets forth dates for the events listed above that differ from the dates set by the Court at the initial case management conference. The dates set forth in the Case Management Scheduling Order are as follows: -2- Case4:10-cv-01059-SBA Document37 Filed07/08/10 Page3 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Event Dates Set By Court in Scheduling Order September 13, 2010 Infringement Contentions (Patent L.R. 3-1) due Invalidity Contentions (Patent L.R. 3-3) due Proposed Terms for Construction (Patent L.R. 4-1) due Preliminary Claim Constructions (Patent L.R. 4-2) due September 28, 2010 September 28, 2010 October 18, 2010 Joint Claim Construction and November 12, 2010 expert reports regarding claim construction due (Patent L.R. 4-3) These dates deviate significantly from the Local Patent Rules. For example, defendant's invalidity contentions are due fifteen days after plaintiffs' infringement contentions are served. Under the Local Patent Rules, defendant should have forty-five days in which to prepare its invalidity contentions. In addition, the parties' proposed terms for construction are due the same day as defendant's invalidity contentions. Under the Local Patent Rules, the parties should have fourteen days in which to identify their proposed terms for construction. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Counsel for the parties jointly contacted the Court regarding the incorrect dates and the italicized language in the Case Management Scheduling Order. The parties were told to file the Case No. 4:10-CV-01059-SBA STIPULATION RE: SCHEDULING ORDER The other dates set by the Court (i.e., the dates that are not identified above) are correct. However, the Case Management Scheduling Order contains the following italicized language in the Deadline to Amend Pleadings Without Leave of Court: "TiVo proposes that this deadline should not apply to inequitable conduct allegations (after this date it is necessary to obtain leave of Court to amend pleadings)." Both parties agree that, in view of the Court's statements at the initial case management conference, this language should be stricken. -3- Case4:10-cv-01059-SBA Document37 Filed07/08/10 Page4 of 7 1 2 3 instant stipulation, requesting a correction of the Case Management Scheduling Order to reflect the dates set by the Court at the initial case management conference (in accordance with the Local Patent Rules) and removing the italicized language. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. 4:10-CV-01059-SBA STIPULATION RE: SCHEDULING ORDER II. STIPULATION THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE, by and through their respective counsel, and respectfully request that the Court correct the Court's Case Management Scheduling Order as follows: Event Infringement Contentions (Patent L.R. 3-1) due Current Date September 13, 2010 New Corrected Date July 8, 2010 Invalidity Contentions (Patent L.R. September 28, 2010 3-3) due Proposed Terms for Construction (Patent L.R. 4-1) due Preliminary Claim Constructions (Patent L.R. 4-2) due Joint Claim Construction and expert reports regarding claim construction due (Patent L.R. 4-3) Deadline to amend pleadings without leave of Court. September 28, 2010 August 23, 2010 September 7, 2010 October 18, 2010 September 27, 2010 November 12, 2010 October 22, 2010 December 17, 2010 December 17, 2010 -4- Case4:10-cv-01059-SBA Document37 Filed07/08/10 Page5 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DATED: July 8, 2010 Respectfully submitted, BAKER BOTTS L.L.P. By: /s/ Kevin E. Cadwell Kevin E. Cadwell Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counterclaim Defendants AT&T Intellectual Property I, L.P. and AT&T Intellectual Property II, L.P. IRELL & MANELLA LLP By: /s/ Azar Mouzari Azar Mouzari Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff TiVo Inc. PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED Date: 7/20/10 _________________________________ Hon. Saundra B. Armstrong United States District Judge Case No. 4:10-CV-01059-SBA STIPULATION RE: SCHEDULING 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?