Elan Microelectronics Corporation v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 425

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING (1) DISPOSITIVE MOTION; (2) EXPERT REPORT; AND (3) TRIAL SCHEDULING by Apple, Inc., Elan Microelectronics Corporation. (Mehta, Sonal) (Filed on 9/12/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

YITAI HU (SBN 248085)
[e-mail]
SEAN P. DEBRUINE (SBN 168071)
[e-mail]
ELIZABETH H. RADER (SBN 184963)
[e-mail]
JANE HAN BU (SBN 240081)
[e-mail]
JENNIFER LIU (SBN 268990)
[e-mail]
PALANI P. RATHINASAMY (SBN 269852)
[e-mail]
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
275 Middlefield Road, Suite 150
Menlo Park, CA 94025-4008
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 650-838-2001
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ELAN MICROELECTRONICS
CORPORATION

MATTHEW D. POWERS (Bar No. 104795)
[e-mail]
TENSEGRITY LAW GROUP LLP
201 Redwood Shores Parkway, Suite 401
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
JARED BOBROW (Bar No. 133712)
[e-mail]
SONAL N. MEHTA (Bar No. 222086)
[e-mail]
DEREK WALTER (Bar No. 246322)
[e-mail]
NATHAN GREENBLATT (Bar No. 262279)
[e-mail]
WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
Silicon Valley Office
201 Redwood Shores Parkway
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

12
Attorneys for Defendant and
Counterclaim Plaintiff,
APPLE INC.

13
14
15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17
18
19
20

ELAN MICROELECTRONICS
CORPORATION,
Plaintiff and Counterclaim
Defendant,

21
22
23

Case No. C-09-01531 RS (PSG)
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REGARDING (1) DISPOSITIVE
MOTION, (2) EXPERT REPORT, AND
(3) TRIAL SCHEDULING

v.
Hon. Richard Seeborg
APPLE INC.,

24

Defendant and Counterclaim
Plaintiff.

25
26
27
28
STIPULATION
SCHEDULING

AND

PROPOSED

ORDER

RE:
Case No. C-09-01531 RS (PSG)

1
2

Defendant Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) and Plaintiff Elan Microelectronics Corporation
(“Elan”), by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

3

WHEREAS, during the August 4, 2011 CMC, the Court advised the parties to

4

meet and confer regarding case scheduling, including scheduling for further dispositive motion

5

practice and trial;

6

WHEREAS, during the August 4, 2011 CMC, the Court expressed a preference for

7

further dispositive motion practice to be reasonably consolidated on at least a patent-by-patent

8

basis;

9
10

WHEREAS, Elan has already filed a motion seeking partial summary judgment of
infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,825,352, which was heard on August 4, 2011;

11

WHEREAS, on August 4, 2011 Apple filed a motion seeking partial summary

12

judgment of non-infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,825,352, which Apple withdrew on August

13

17, 2011, to be re-filed following the parties’ meet-and-confer on scheduling given the Court’s

14

expressed preference for consolidation of dispositive motion practice (see Dkt. No. 403);

15

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed, subject to the Court’s approval, that by

16

September 14, 2011, Apple will file its motion for summary judgment of indefiniteness of claims

17

24, 26 and 30 of the ’352 patent and re-file its motion for partial summary judgment of non-

18

infringement of the ‘352 patent, with the hearing on those motions scheduled for October 20,

19

2011;

20

WHEREAS, the parties have further agreed, subject to the Court’s approval, that

21

they will file dispositive motions on the other three patents-in-suit on October 27, 2011. The

22

parties anticipate that those motions will include Elan’s motion for partial summary judgment that

23

Apple infringes its U.S. Patent No. 7,274,353 and that the asserted claims of Apple’s U.S. Patens

24

No. 5,764,218 and 7,495,659 are invalid, as well as Apple’s motion for partial summary judgment

25

that the ‘353 patent claims are invalid.

26
27

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed that these motions may be heard by the Court
on January 12, 2012, or a date or dates thereafter convenient for the Court;

28
STIPULATION
SCHEDULING

AND

PROPOSED

ORDER

RE:

2

Case No. C-09-01531 RS (PSG)

1

WHEREAS, the parties have further agreed, subject to the Court’s approval, that

2

trial be scheduled to commence on January 21, 2013, or any date thereafter subject to the Court’s

3

calendar;

4

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties,

5

through their respective counsel, that the following schedule be adopted for the completion of

6

dispositive motions, expert discovery, and trial:

7

EVENT

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

DATE

Additional Opening Dispositive Motions
Regarding U.S. Patent No. 5,825,352

No later than Sept. 14, 2011

Oppositions to Additional Dispositive Motions
Regarding U.S. Patent No. 5,825,352

September 29, 2011

Reply Briefs in Support of Additional
Dispositive Motions Regarding U.S. Patent No.
5,825,352

October 6, 2011

Hearing on Additional Dispositive Motions
Regarding U.S. Patent No. 5,825,352

October 20, 2011

Opening Dispositive Motions Regarding
Patents-in-Suit Other than U.S. Patent No.
5,825,352

October 27, 2011

Oppositions to Dispositive Motions Regarding
Patents-in-Suit Other U.S. Patent No.
5,825,352

November 18, 2011

Reply Briefs in Support of Dispositive Motions
Regarding Patents-in-Suit Other than U.S.
Patent No. 5,825,352

December 8, 2011

Hearing on Dispositive Motions Regarding
Patents-in-Suit Other than U.S. Patent No.
5,825,352

January 12, 2012, or any time thereafter subject
to the Court’s calendar

Opening Expert Reports

July 13, 2012

Rebuttal Expert Reports

August 17, 2012

22

Close of Expert Witness Discovery

September 14, 2012

23

Trial

January 21, 2013, or any date thereafter subject
to the Court’s calendar

24
25
IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

26
27

DATED: September 12, 2011

/s/ Sean P. DeBruine ______
Sean P. DeBruine

28
STIPULATION
SCHEDULING

AND

PROPOSED

ORDER

RE:

3

Case No. C-09-01531 RS (PSG)

1

ALSTON & BIRD LLP
Attorneys For Elan Microelectronics Corporation

2
3
DATED: September 12, 2011

/s/ Sonal N. Mehta
Sonal N. Mehta

4
5

WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
Attorneys for Apple Inc.

6
7

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
9
10

DATED: __________________
Honorable Richard Seeborg
United States District Court Judge

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

AND

PROPOSED

ORDER

RE:

4

Case No. C-09-01531 RS (PSG)

1

FILER’S ATTESTATION

2

I, Sonal N. Mehta, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file
this STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING (1) DISPOSITIVE MOTION,
(2) EXPERT REPORT, AND (3) TRIAL SCHEDULING. In compliance with General Order 45,
paragraph X.B. I hereby attest that Sean DeBruine has concurred in this filing.

3
4
5

By:

/s/ Sonal N. Mehta
Sonal N. Mehta

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

AND

PROPOSED

ORDER

RE:

5

Case No. C-09-01531 RS (PSG)