Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Bel Fuse Inc. et al

Filing 202

STIPULATION AND ORDER 198 re: Case Schedule: Status Conference set for 8/6/2010 10:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 4th Floor, San Jose. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 5/20/10. (jgS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/20/2010)

Download PDF
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 Michael J. Kane (pro hac vice / kane@fr.com) FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 60 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 335-5070 Facsimile: (612) 288-9696 Attorneys for Plaintiff HALO ELECTRONICS, INC. Martin G. Raskin (pro hac vice / mraskin@cozen.com) Andrew P. Nemiroff (pro hac vice / anemiroff@cozen.com) COZEN O'CONNOR 277 Park Avenue New York, NY 10172 Telephone: (212) 986-1116 Facsimile: (212) 509-9492 Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff BEL FUSE, INC. Kenneth J. Sheehan (pro hac vice / ksheehan@bakerlaw.com) A. Neal Seth (pro hac vice / nseth@bakerlaw.com) BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 1050 Connecticut Ave. NW Washington DC 20036 Attorneys for Defendant WURTH ELECTRONICS MIDCOM, INC. Michael J. Powell (pro hac vice / mpowell@bakerdonelson.com) Kent A. Lambert (pro hac vice / klambert@bakerdonelson.com) BAKER DONELSON BEARMAN CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, P.C. Monarch Plaza, Suite 1600 3414 Peachtree Road, NE Atlanta, Georgia 30326 Telephone: (678) 406-8707 Facsimile: (678) 406-8807 Attorneys for Defendants ELEC & ELTEK (USA) CORPORATION E & E MAGNETIC PRODUCTS LIMITED Harold C. Moore (pro hac vice / hcmoore@maginot.com) David M. Lockman (pro hac vice / dmlockman@maginot.com) MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK LLP Chase Tower 111 Monument Circle, Suite 3250 Indianapolis IN 46204 Telephone: (317) 638-2922 Facsimile (317) 638-2139 Attorneys for Defendant XFMRS, INC Additional counsel listed on the signature page *E-FILED - 5/20/10* UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (SAN JOSE DIVISION) HALO ELECTRONICS, INC., Plaintiff, v. BEL FUSE INC., E & E MAGNETIC PRODUCTS LIMITED, ELEC & ELTEK (USA) CORPORATION, WURTH ELECTRONICS MIDCOM, INC., WURTH ELEKTRONIK GMBH & CO. KG, and XFMRS, INC., Defendants Civil Case No. 07-6222 RMW STIPULATION AND [] ORDER RE CASE SCHEDULE STIPULATION AND [] ORDER RE CASE SCHEDULE Case No. 07-6222 RMW 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 1 On May 7, 2010, the Court held a Claim Construction Prehearing Conference. Pursuant to the Court's Order at the Prehearing Conference, the February 2, 2010 Case Management Order (Dkt. No. 142) is vacated. Further, the parties hereby stipulate and jointly propose the following case schedule for the Court's consideration:1 PARTY Defendants EVENT Defendants are to identify all their products that have been sold that (1) are related to Halo's patents and (2) are understood by Defendants to be accused of infringement. If not already provided, Defendants shall provide Halo information sufficient to identify and analyze those products for purposes of proposing representative products. Halo is to identify deficiencies, if any, in Defendants' identification of products and/or production of information related to those products. The parties are to meet and confer regarding any alleged deficiencies identified by Halo. DATE No later than May 28, 2010 Halo No later than June 4, 2010 All Halo No later than June 11, 2010 For each asserted claim, Halo is to provide each No later than June 18, 2010 Defendant with an identification of a proposed representative product that allegedly infringes that claim and the family of products that the representative product represents. The parties are to meet and confer to reach agreement as to appropriate representative products and families represented as well as to reducing the number of claims in dispute. The parties are to exchange an amended list of proposed claim terms for construction. Except for good cause, other than the allegedly indefinite claim terms previously identified by Defendants under Patent L.R. 4-1, no additional claim term No later than June 25, 2010 All All No later than July 7, 2010 Defendant E & E Magnetic Products Limited has filed a motion to dismiss this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2) and (6) and is not participating in this submission. Nevertheless, to the extent product identifications and information identified in this submission are in the possession, custody and control of Defendant Elec & Eltek (USA) Corporation ("E&E USA"), E&E USA will provide such product identifications and information. STIPULATION AND [] ORDER RE CASE 1 SCHEDULE Case No. 07-6222 RMW 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 PARTY EVENT shall be added to the terms identified in the parties' Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement filed on April 5, 2010 (Dkt. No. 169). DATE Defendants Defendants are to provide Halo with proposed alternative constructions, if any, for allegedly indefinite terms, and to identify both extrinsic and intrinsic evidence supporting the proposed alternative constructions. Halo is to provide to Defendants a draft Amended Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement. Defendants are to provide to Halo any revisions to the draft Amended Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement. The parties are to meet and confer to finalize the Amended Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement. The parties are to submit to the Court an Amended Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement including an identification of: 1) the asserted claims; 2) for each asserted claim, a proposed representative product of each Defendant that allegedly infringes that claim and the family of products that the representative product represents; 3) the claim terms proposed for construction including an identification of the 10 most significant terms as per Pat. L. R. 4-3(c); and 4) summary judgment motions each party intends to file which turn on the claim construction issues, and a proposed briefing schedule. Status conference with the Court to set briefing schedule for claim construction and summary judgment motions and to set date for Markman/summary judgment hearing. No later than July 12, 2010 Halo No later than July 15, 2010 Defendants No later than July 19, 2010 All No later than July 22, 2010 All No later than July 28, 2010 All August 6, 2010, subject to the Court's availability 2 STIPULATION AND [] ORDER RE CASE SCHEDULE Case No. 07-6222 RMW 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 Nothing in this stipulation shall be deemed to preclude any party from seeking additional discovery by motion or otherwise nor be deemed to preclude any objection by any party to producing additional discovery. Respectfully submitted, Dated:___5/14/2010______________ By:____ Michael J. Kane__________ Michael J. Kane (pro hac vice / kane@fr.com) William R. Woodford (pro hac vice / woodford@fr.com) FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 60 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 335-5070 Facsimile: (612) 288-9696 Limin Zheng (CA #226875 / zheng@fr.com) FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 500 Arguello Street, Suite 500 Redwood City, CA 94063 Telephone: (650) 839-5070 Facsimile: (650) 839-5071 Attorneys for Plaintiff HALO ELECTRONICS, INC. Dated: ___5/14/2010______________ By:_____ Michael J. Powell _________ Michael J. Powell (pro hac vice / mpowell@bakerdonelson.com) Kent A. Lambert (pro hac vice / klambert@bakerdonelson.com) BAKER DONELSON BEARMAN CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, P.C. Monarch Plaza, Suite 1600 3414 Peachtree Road, NE Atlanta, Georgia 30326 Telephone: (678) 406-8707 Facsimile: (678) 406-8807 Terry J. Mollica (SBN 139816 / tjm@cmlawoffices.com) CHIARELLI & MOLLICA LLP 2121 North California Blvd., Suite 290 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Telephone: (925) 974-3325 Facsimile: (925) 974-3506 Attorneys for Defendant ELEC & ELTEK (USA) CORPORATION E & E MAGNETIC PRODUCTS LIMITED Dated: ___5/14/2010______________ By: _____A. Neal Seth ____________ Emily R. Frank (SBN 232939 / efrank@bakerlaw.com BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 600 Anton Blvd., Suite 900 Costa Mesa, CA 92626-7221 Telephone: (714) 754-6600 Facsimile: (714) 754-6611 Kenneth J. Sheehan (pro hac vice / ksheehan@bakerlaw.com) A. Neal Seth (pro hac vice / nseth@bakerlaw.com) 3 STIPULATION AND [] ORDER RE CASE SCHEDULE Case No. 07-6222 RMW Dated: ___5/14/2010______________ By: ____Andrew P. Nemiroff _______ Martin C. Fliesler (SBN 073768 mcf@fdml.com) FLIESLER MEYER LLP 650 California St., 14th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 362-2800 Facsimile: (415) 362-2928 Martin G. Raskin (pro hac vice / mraskin@cozen.com) Andrew P. Nemiroff (pro hac vice / anemiroff@cozen.com) COZEN O'CONNOR 277 Park Avenue 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 New York, NY 10172 Telephone: (212) 986-1116 Facsimile: (212) 509-9492 Attorneys for Defendant/CounterclaimPlaintiff BEL FUSE, INC. BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 1050 Connecticut Ave. NW Washington DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 861-1500 Facsimile: (202) 861-1783 Attorneys for Defendant WURTH ELECTRONICS MIDCOM, INC. Dated: ___5/14/2010______________ By: ___Harold C. Moore __________ Harold C. Moore (pro hac vice / hcmoore@maginot.com) David M. Lockman (pro hac vice / dmlockman@maginot.com) MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK LLP Chase Tower 111 Monument Circle, Suite 3250 Indianapolis IN 46204 Telephone: (317) 638-2922 Facsimile (317) 638-2139 Attorneys for Defendant XFMRS, INC IT IS SO ORDERED. 5/20/10 Dated: ___________________ __________________________________ HONORABLE RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge 4 STIPULATION AND [] ORDER RE CASE SCHEDULE Case No. 07-6222 RMW 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 Pursuant to the Northern District of California Electronic Filing Procedures and General Order No. 45, I attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the signatories listed above. Dated: May 14, 2010 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. By: /s/ Limin Zheng__________________ Limin Zheng Attorney for Plaintiff HALO ELECTRONICS, INC. 5 STIPULATION AND [] ORDER RE CASE SCHEDULE Case No. 07-6222 RMW

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?