Aristocrat Technologies et al v. International Game Technology et al

Filing 446

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER re 442 Response ( Non Motion ) filed by IGT, 441 Proposed Order filed by Australia PTY Limited, Aristocrat Technologies, Inc. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 2/19/2009. (rmwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/19/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United 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 2. v. INTERNATIONAL GAME TECHNOLOGY and IGT, Defendants. As discussed at the hearing, and as informed by the parties' recent submissions, the court enters the following case management order: The court's additions to the parties' joint proposal are emphasized. 1. The Markman claim construction hearing and tutorial shall begin at 9:00 a.m. on March 18, 2009. The parties shall begin the hearing with a non-argumentative technical tutorial of approximately 45 minute per side by counsel and/or experts. Defendants may file their motion for summary judgment of noninfringement based upon the Muniauction case. The motion must be noticed for a hearing in compliance with Civil L.R. 7-2(a)'s 35-day notice provision, i.e., the motion will not be heard at the claim construction hearing.
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER No. C-06-03717 RMW TSF

E-filed on:

2/19/2009

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED and ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiffs,

No. C-06-03717 RMW CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER [Re Docket Nos. 441, 442]

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

3.

Aristocrat may file a Rule 56(f) request for discovery in response to defendants' motion for summary judgment of non-infringement, after which Aristocrat may initiate such discovery, if any, as the Court permits. No discovery shall take place until an Order permitting discovery is entered.

4.

Following the Markman hearing on March 18, 2009, the Court will conduct a further Case Management Conference regarding other matters, including setting a trial date. The parties shall be prepared to discuss case scheduling and trial dates at that time.

5.

The court will hear argument on IGT's motion for summary judgment of invalidity due to indefiniteness (docket no. 163) at the March 18 claim construction hearing because considering the motion at the same time as claim construction is efficient.

6.

The court requests that the parties promptly submit chambers copies of all of the claim construction briefing, indefiniteness briefing, and all supporting materials to enable the court to prepare for the March 18 hearing.

The court is disappointed that the parties were unable to reach agreement on the case management order and is hopeful that it will not have to resolve such disputes in the future.

DATED:

2/19/2009

RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER No. C-06-03717 RMW TSF

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

Notice of this document has been electronically sent to: Counsel for Aristocrat entities: Robert J. Blanch, Jr [e-mail] Anthony R. DeAlcuaz [e-mail] Terrence Patrick McMahon [e-mail] Counsel for IGT entities: Patrick Marshall Bible Lane M Chitwood Kristin L. Cleveland Robert T. Cruzen Stephanie Sue Irvine Jeffrey Stewart Love Gabriel M. Ramsey Adam Randal Wichman Garth Alan Winn [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel that have not registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program.

Dated:

2/19/2009

TSF Chambers of Judge Whyte

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER No. C-06-03717 RMW TSF

3