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

Filing 370

STIPULATION AND ORDER 366 Revising Case Schedule. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 5/17/11. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/17/2011)

1
2
3
4
5

Michael J. Kane ([e-mail])
(MN#247625)
William R. Woodford ([e-mail])
(MN#322593)
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
3200 RBC Plaza
60 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 5540
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

6
7
8
9

Juanita Brooks (CA #75934 /
[e-mail])
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
12390 El Camino Real
San Diego, CA 92130
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

10
11
12
13
14
15

Limin Zheng (CA #226875 /
[e-mail])
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
500 Arguello Street, Suite 500
Redwood City, CA 94063
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
HALO ELECTRONICS, INC.

16
17

Harold C. Moore ([e-mail])
(IN#19004-49)
Michael A. Swift ([e-mail])
(IN#17779-49)
MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK LLP
Chase Tower
111 Monument Circle, Suite 3250
Indianapolis IN 46204
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
XFMRS, INC
FLIESLER MEYER LLP
Martin C. Fliesler (SBN 073768)
[e-mail]
Rex Hwang (SBN 063491) [e-mail]
650 California St., 14th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94108
[phone]
COZEN O’CONNOR
Martin G. Raskin [pro hac vice]
Andrew P. Nemiroff [pro hac vice]
250 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10017
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff
BEL FUSE, INC.
*E-FILED - 5/17/11*

18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

20

(SAN JOSE DIVISION)

21

HALO ELECTRONICS, INC.,
Plaintiff,

22
23
24
25

v.

Civil Case No. 07-6222 RMW (HRL)
JOINT STIPULATED ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION FOR AN ORDER REVISING
CASE SCHEDULE; [] ORDER

BEL FUSE INC. and XFMRS, INC.,
Defendants.

26
27
28
Case No. 07-6222 RMW

1

On March 24, 2011, the Court issued an Order setting the post-Markman case schedule.

2

(Dkt. 360). Following further meet and confer, the parties have agreed to, and hereby propose, the

3

following revised discovery deadlines. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11, the parties respectfully

4

request that the Court issue an Order resetting certain deadlines in the case schedule as set forth

5

below. The proposed changes do not affect any hearing or proceeding on the Court’s calendar.

6
7

EVENT

8

RELEVANT LOCAL
RULE1 OR COURT’S
STANDING ORDER

CURRENTLY
SCHEDULE DATES

REVISED
DATES

9
Non-Deposition
Fact Discovery
Cut-Off

May 10, 2011

May 10, 2011

Fact Deposition
Cut-Off (except for
the deposition of
T.K. Luk)2

May 10, 20113

June 17, 2011

May 17, 2011

July 7, 2011

Deadline for Expert
Reports for Issues
on which the
Parties Bear the
Burden

June 10, 2011

July 8, 2011

Deadline for
Rebuttal Expert
Reports

10

July 1, 2011

July 29, 2011

11
12
13
14

Final Date for
Motions to Compel
Fact Discovery
(including both
non-deposition and
deposition
discovery)

15
16
17

No more than 7 days
after cut-off
(Civ. L.R. 37-3)

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1

25

The applicable Patent Local Rules are the Patent Local Rules instituted on January 1, 2001,
because this case was filed prior to March 1, 2008.

26

2

27

To the extent Mr. T.K. Luk will testify at the trial, he may be deposed in the United States by
Plaintiff at least one week before the trial,
3

28

The March 24, 2011 Order did not distinguish non-deposition and deposition fact discovery.
1

JOINT STIPULATED ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
FOR AN ORDER REVISING CASE SCHEDULE
Case No. 07-6222 RMW

1
2
3
4

Expert Discovery
Cut-Off
Final Date for
Motions to Compel
Expert Discovery

July 26, 2011
No later than 7 days
after cut-off
(Civ. L.R. 37-3)

August 17, 2011

August 2, 2011

August 26, 2011

5
6
7

The Proposed Revised Dates do not affect any other dates, including the Trial Date, set in
the March 24, 2011 Order.

8
9
10

Respectfully submitted,

11
12

Dated: ___ April 27, 2011

MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK LLP
By:

13
14
15

/s/Harold C. Moore
Harold C. Moore
Attorneys for Defendant
XMFRS, INC.

16
17

Dated: ___ April 27, 2011

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

18

By:

19
20

_/s/Limin Zheng
Limin Zheng
Attorneys for Plaintiff
HALO, INC.

21
Dated: ___ April 27, 2011

COZEN O’CONNOR

22
By:

23
24

/s/Andrew P. Nemiroff
Andrew P. Nemiroff
Attorneys for Defendant
BEL FUSE, INC.

25
26
27
28

2

JOINT STIPULATED ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
FOR AN ORDER REVISING CASE SCHEDULE
Case No. 07-6222 RMW

1

Pursuant to the Northern District of California Electronic Filing Procedures and General

2

Order No. 45, I attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from

3

counsel for the parties, the signatories listed above.

4

Dated: ___ April 27, 2011

MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK LLP

5
By: /s/Harold C. Moore
Harold C. Moore
Attorney for Defendant
XFMRS, INC.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3

JOINT STIPULATED ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
FOR AN ORDER REVISING CASE SCHEDULE
Case No. 07-6222 RMW

[] ORDER

1
2
3

Good cause having been shown, the Court grants the parties’ administrative request and
adopts the Proposed Revised Dates proposed by the Parties as revisions to the case schedule.

4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8

5/17/11
Dated: ___________________

__________________________________
HONORABLE RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4

JOINT STIPULATED ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
FOR AN ORDER REVISING CASE SCHEDULE
Case No. 07-6222 RMW