Mformation Technologies, Inc. v. Research in Motion Limited et al

Filing 83

STIPULATION AND ORDER AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT CONTINUING DATES FOR CLAIM TUTORIAL AND CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARINGS re 80 Stipulation. On 11/19/2009 09:00 AM the Court will conduct a Tutorial on the patents-in-suit. On 11/20/2009, the Court will hol d the Claim Construction hearing. The Claim Construction briefing schedule shall be in accordance with the Local Patent Rules and the Court's Patent Scheduling Order. Signed by Judge James Ware on 9/29/2009. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/30/2009)

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

Marc H. Cohen (CA Bar No. 168773) Bradford John Black (CA Bar No. 252031) KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP P.O. Box 51827 Palo Alto, CA 94304 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED and RESEARCH IN MOTION CORPORATION

N

D IS T IC T R

OF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION MFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, v. RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED, a Canadian corporation AND RESEARCH IN MOTION CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs. JOINT STIPULATION PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 6-1(b), 6-2 AND 7-12 TO CHANGE DATES FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING AND CASE TUTORIAL Case No. 5:08-CV-04990-JW Jury Trial Demanded

Joint Stipulation Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-1(b), 6-2 and 7-12 to Change Dates for Claim Construction Hearing and Case Tutorial

Case No. 5:08-CV-04990-JW

A

Linda S. DeBruin (Admitted to this Court on September 27,1991) Aaron D. Charfoos (pro hac vice) Maria A. Meginnes (pro hac vice) KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 300 North LaSalle Chicago, Illinois 60654 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail]

UNIT ED

S

S DISTRICT TE C TA

ER

C

LI

FO

mes Wa Judge Ja

re

R NIA

DERED SO OR ED IT IS DIFI AS MO

RT U O

NO

RT

H

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

Plaintiff Mformation Technologies, Inc. ("Mformation") and Defendants Research In Motion Ltd. and Research In Motion Corp. (collectively "RIM") jointly request that this Court reset the Case Tutorial and Claim Construction Hearing dates. The parties propose that these hearings be

scheduled to the earliest dates available at the Court's convenience during the weeks of November 16, November 30 or December 7, 2009, with a preference for the week of December 7, 2009. The parties further request that the claim construction briefing schedule be in accordance with the Local Patent Rules, with the due dates for the briefs to be calculated from the date of the Claim Construction Hearing. Because the parties are asking that the claim construction briefing schedule be changed and Mformation's opening claim construction brief is currently scheduled to be filed in two days, on Friday, September 25, 2009, the parties note that this request is ready for decision immediately. In order to permit Mformation to avoid filing its opening claim construction brief unnecessarily early, the parties respectfully request that the Court rule on this request by Friday, September 25, 2009. On September 22, 2009, this Court reset the Case Tutorial previously scheduled for October 16, 2009 to October 14, 2009 and the Claim Construction Hearing previously scheduled for October 30, 2009 to October 15, 2009. (Dkt. No. 79.) As outlined in the parties' Interim Joint Case Management Statement, Mformation is currently scheduled to file its reply claim construction brief on October 16, 2009--one day after the rescheduled Claim Construction Hearing. (See Dkt. No. 75 at 3.) Under these revised hearing dates, the parties will be unable to complete the claim

construction briefing provided for in this Court's Patent Scheduling Order and the Local Patent Rules. Additionally, both parties will be hampered in their ability to prepare their presentations for the Claim Construction Hearing. The Local Patent Rules provide that the final claim construction brief be filed 14 days before the Claim Construction Hearing, but under this Court's current schedule, the Claim Construction Hearing will be held a mere six days after RIM files its responsive claim construction brief. Therefore, the parties respectfully request that this Court move the Claim Construction Hearing to a later date, to allow the parties to complete the claim construction briefing and provide adequate time for the Claim Construction Hearing preparations. The parties understand the Court
Joint Stipulation Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-1(b), 6-2 and 7-12 to Change Dates for Claim Construction Hearing and Case Tutorial -1Case No. 5:08-CV-04990-JW

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

may have availability during the weeks of November 16, November 30, and December 7, 2009, and therefore request that the Claim Construction Hearing be moved to a date some time during those weeks. The parties have a preference for the week of December 7, 2009, due to other obligations of counsel, but will accept any dates given during those weeks. In accordance with the Local Patent Rules and this Court's Patent Scheduling Order, the claim construction briefing schedule would then be tied to the new date for the Claim Construction Hearing, with Mformation's opening brief due 35 days prior to the Claim Construction Hearing, RIM's responsive brief due 21 days prior to the hearing, and Mformation's reply brief due 14 days prior to the hearing. Additionally, in order for the Case Tutorial to provide the most benefit, the parties suggest that it be scheduled for a date in proximity to the date set for the Claim Construction Hearing. There have been three prior modifications of time in this case: (1) On November 20, 2008, the parties stipulated to a 29-day extension of time for Defendants to respond to Plaintiff's original Complaint. The Court approved this stipulation on November 25, 2008. (Dkt. No. 12.); (2) On January 7, 2009, the parties stipulated to an extension of time giving the Defendants until January 27, 2009, to answer the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, and giving the Defendants an additional four weeks beyond the time specified in the Patent Local Rules in which to serve their invalidity contentions and disclosures per Patent L.R. 3-3 and 3-4. The Court approved this stipulation on January 16, 2009. (Dkt. No. 30); and, (3) On September 4, 2009, the parties stipulated to an extension of time giving the Defendants until September 15, 2009, to answer the Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint, and giving Plaintiff until September 30, 2009, in which to answer both that September 15 filing and Defendants' First Amended Answer, Defenses, and Counterclaims. The Court approved this stipulation on September 16, 2009. (Dkt. No. 77). The present modifications will not adversely impact the case schedule. For the foregoing reasons, the parties jointly request that this Court reset the Claim Construction Hearing and Case Tutorial for dates during the weeks of November 16, November 30 or December 7, 2009, and preferably during the week of December 7, 2009. The parties additionally
Joint Stipulation Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-1(b), 6-2 and 7-12 to Change Dates for Claim Construction Hearing and Case Tutorial -2Case No. 5:08-CV-04990-JW

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

request that the claim construction briefing schedule be in accordance with the Local Patent Rules and this Court's Patent Schedule Order. DATED: September 23, 2009 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP Respectfully submitted, /s/ Shawn E. McDonald_________________ Shawn E. McDonald Amar L. Thakur (CA Bar No. 194025) Shawn E. McDonald (CA Bar No. 237580) Gray M. Buccigross, (CA Bar No. 234558) Rebecca L. Hanovice (CA Bar No. 259876) SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP A Limited Liability Partnership Including Professional Corporations 12275 El Camino Real, Suite 200 San Diego, California 92130 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail] Nathaniel P. Bruno (CA Bar No. 228118) SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP A Limited Liability Partnership Including Professional Corporations Four Embarcadero Center, 17th Floor San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorney for Plaintiff and Counter-defendant Mformation Technologies, Inc.

Joint Stipulation Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-1(b), 6-2 and 7-12 to Change Dates for Claim Construction Hearing and Case Tutorial

-3-

Case No. 5:08-CV-04990-JW

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 _______________________________ JAMES WARE Joint Stipulation Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-1(b), 6-2 United States District Judge -4Case No. 5:08-CV-04990-JW
and 7-12 to Change Dates for Claim Construction Hearing and Case Tutorial

DATED: September 23, 2009

KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Respectfully submitted, /s/Marc H. Cohen Marc H. Cohen Linda S. DeBruin (Admitted to this Court on September 27,1991) Aaron D. Charfoos (pro hac vice) Maria A. Meginnes (pro hac vice) KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 300 North LaSalle Chicago, Illinois 60654 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail] Marc H. Cohen (CA Bar No. 168773) Bradford John Black (CA Bar No. 252031) KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP P.O. Box 51827 Palo Alto, CA 94304 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants and Counter-claimants Research In Motion Limited and Research In Motion Corporation

*** ORDER *** Filer's Attestation: Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B) regarding signatures, Marc H. The Court finds good cause to GRANT filing of this document has been obtained. Cohen hereby attests that concurrence in thethe parties' Stipulation re: continuing the Tutorial and Markman hearings. Accordingly, the October 8 & 9, 2009 hearings are continued as follows: (1) On November 19, 2009 at 9 a.m., the Court will conduct a Tutorial on the patents-in-suit. (2) On November 20, 2009 at 9 a.m., the Court will hold the Claim Construction hearing. The Claim Construction briefing schedule shall be in accordance with the Local Patent Rules and the Court's Patent Scheduling Order. Dated: September 29, 2009