Nazomi Communications Inc v. Nokia Corporation et al

Filing 340

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on April 16, 2012. (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/16/2012)

1
2
3
4
5

E-FILED on___4/12/12___________

6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12
13

NAZOMI COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,

14
15
16

No. C-10-04686 RMW

Plaintiff,
v.
NOKIA CORPORATION, et al.,

17

Defendants.

18
19

NAZOMI COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,

20

No. C-10-05545 RMW

Plaintiff,
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

21
22

v.
SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS
AMERICA, L.L.C., et al.,

23
Defendants.
24
25
26

On April 11, 2012, the court held a further case management conference to discuss the

27

scheduling of various hearings and motions in the instant actions. After considering the issues

28

raised by all parties, the court orders as follows:
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER-Nos. C-10-04686 RMW and C-10-05545 RMW

1
2

1. On August 9, 2012 the court will hold an expedited claim construction hearing and hearing
on defendants' summary judgment motion on the sole issue of whether the asserted claims require

3
the patented central processing unit or system to have the ability to perform the recited functions
4
5

(e.g., "to execute," "to maintain," "to decode") without modification. However, the court will not

6

otherwise construe the meaning of any particular word contained within the claims (e.g., "execute,"

7

"maintain," "decode") at the expedited hearing.

8

2. Defendants shall re-file their pending motion for summary judgment based upon their

9
contention that the accused products cannot perform the recited functions without modification
10
11
12
13
14
15

because the claims-at-issue require that the patented processing unit or system perform the recited
functions without modification and their accused products do not or cannot do so.
3. Defendant ARM may not notice its proposed motion for summary judgment concerning a
cap on royalty damages until at least thirty (30) days after the initial, limited claim construction
hearing.

16
17

4. On November 15, 2012 the court will hold a full claim construction hearing as

18

contemplated by the local rules on up to ten disputed terms. The hearings on all three patents-in-suit

19

will be held on the same day, or on two consecutive days if the time necessary for presentation

20

requires. Any party who believes that its claim interpretation is claim dispositive shall file a

21

summary judgment motion to be heard contemporaneously with the hearing on the construction of

22
23

the disputed terms. This order is without prejudice to a request by any party involved in the '160

24

patent infringement litigation for a continuance of the hearing date if, despite due diligence, that

25

party has been unable to obtain necessary third-party discovery. Any such motion for a continuance

26

must be filed no later than thirty (30) days before the date of the scheduled claim construction

27

hearing.

28
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER-Nos. C-10-04686 RMW and C-10-05545 RMW

2

1
2
3

5. The scope of discovery is not limited at this time, but the parties are cautioned to focus on
issues relevant to the initial, limited claim construction issue and pending motion for summary
judgment related thereto as that discovery must be completed by July 18, 2012.1

4
6. The parties are to agree on the structure and method of presentation of a technology

5
6

tutorial to be held before each claim construction hearing. The court must be advised of the agreed-

7

upon structure and method of presentation at least thirty (30) days before the relevant hearing and, if

8

the parties cannot agree, their respective proposals must be submitted to the court.

9
In accord with the above, the court adopts the following schedule:
10
Date

Expedited Claim
Construction and Summary
Judgment Schedule

June 15, 2012

Discovery cut-off for issues
relevant to initial, limited
claim construction and
defendants' summary
judgment motion

June 29, 2012

11

Defendants' opening claim
construction and summary
judgment briefs due

July 13, 2012

Plaintiff's responsive claim
construction and summary
judgment briefs due

July 20, 2012

Defendants' reply brief due
(summary judgment only)

August 2, 2012

Technology tutorial

August 9, 2012

Hearing on expedited claim
construction and summary
judgment motion

12
13
14
15

Full Markman and Subsequent
Proceedings

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1

27
28

The court questions whether any discovery is necessary to assist in deciding whether the
patented CPU or system must have the ability to perform the recited functions without modification.
However, plaintiff may need some discovery in order to adequately present its response to the motion
for summary judgment.
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER-Nos. C-10-04686 RMW and C-10-05545 RMW

3

1

Date

2
3

Expedited Claim
Construction and Summary
Judgment Schedule

Full Markman and Subsequent
Proceedings

August 17, 2012

Patent L.R. 4-1 exchange of proposed
terms for construction at full Markman
hearing

August 31, 2012

Patent L.R. 4-2 exchange of
preliminary constructions and
supporting evidence for full Markman
hearing

September 10, 2012

Earliest date for filing of summary
judgment motion on cap for royalty
damages

September 14, 2012

Patent L.R. 4-3 joint claim
construction and prehearing statement
for full Markman hearing

October 5, 2012

Discovery cut-off for claim
construction issues

October 12, 2012

Patent L.R. 4-5(a) Plaintiff's opening
claim construction brief due; Motion
for summary judgment to be filed by
any party who believes its claim
construction of any term, if adopted, is
claim dispositive

October 26, 2012

Patent L.R. 4-5(b) Defendants'
responsive construction brief due;
Opposition to summary judgment
motion, if applicable, to be filed

November 2, 2012

Patent L.R. 4-5(c) Plaintiff's responsive
claim construction brief due; Reply to
Opposition to summary judgment
motion, if applicable, to be filed

24

November 8, 2012

Technology tutorial

25

November 15, 2012

Markman hearing and hearing on
any motion for summary judgment
based upon claim dispositive
construction

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

26
27
28
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER-Nos. C-10-04686 RMW and C-10-05545 RMW

4

1

Date

Expedited Claim
Construction and Summary
Judgment Schedule

2
3

Full Markman and Subsequent
Proceedings

50 days after
Markman order

Patent L.R. 3-7 deadline

60 days after
Markman order

Parties with the burden of proof
designate expert witnesses (non-claim
construction issues) and serve expert
reports

90 days after
Markman order

(1) Parties designate rebuttal expert
witnesses (non-claim construction
issues) and serve expert reports; (2)
Close of fact discovery

120 days after
Markman order

Close of expert discovery

13

150 days after
Markman order

Dispositive motion cut-off (last day to
file)

14

10 days before trial

Final pretrial conference

15

July 2013 (Estimated
Date)

Trial

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

16
17

The above schedule is not intended to suggest whether the issues relevant to the '160 patent

18
will be tried together with the issues related to the '362 and '436 patents or separately. This order is
19
20
21
22

also without prejudice to motions to bifurcate issues or parties or otherwise schedule the order of
trial.
DATED: April 16, 2012
RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER-Nos. C-10-04686 RMW and C-10-05545 RMW

5