Innovus Prime, LLC v. Panasonic Corporation et al

Filing 47

ORDER REGARDING SUMMARY JUDGMENT DISCOVERY AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE by Judge Ronald M. Whyte (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/20/2012)

1
2
3
4

E-FILED on 9/20/12

5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12

INNOVUS PRIME LLC.,

13
14
15
16
17

No. 12-CV-00660 RMW

Plaintiff,
ORDER REGARDING SUMMARY
JUDGMENT AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

v.
PANASONIC CORPORATION,
PANASONIC CORPORATION OF
AMERICA.,
Defendants.

18
19

On August 31, 2012, the court held a hearing on plaintiff's Rule 56(d) motion. The court

20

continued the September 21, 2012 hearing on Panasonic's motion for summary judgment and

21

ordered the parties to meet and confer regarding the scheduling of discovery, as well as further

22

briefing and a hearing on defendant's summary judgment motion. The parties have been unable to

23

reach an agreement.

24

It is hereby ordered that plaintiff may take the deposition of the two witnesses who submitted

25

declarations in support of Panasonic's motion for summary judgment, Mr. Watanabe and Mr. Peters.

26

The witnesses may appear voluntarily at any location agreed upon by the parties, or their

27

depositions may be taken pursuant to the Hague Convention. Panasonic shall produce documents in

28

its possession, to the extent they exist, reflecting communications between Philips and Panasonic

ORDER REGARDING SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE—No. 12-00660 RMW

1

during the negotiation of the 1982 and 2007 Agreements regarding the scope of the non-assert and

2

correspondence between Panasonic and Philips regarding the declarations submitted in support of

3

the summary judgment motion. Plaintiff may request similar documents from Phillips. Panasonic

4

shall produce the documents in its possession at least two weeks prior to the taking of either

5

deposition.

6

Given that plaintiff may need to proceed by way of the Hague Convention, and that all other

7

discovery is currently stayed, the court sees little prejudice in delaying the close of summary

8

judgment-related discovery as requested by plaintiff. Accordingly, the court orders the following

9

schedule:

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

April 30, 2013: Close of Summary Judgment-related discovery

11

May 10, 2013: Last day for defendants to re-file MSJ

12

May 24, 2013: Last day for plaintiff's opposition

13

May 31, 2013: Last day for defendants' reply

14

Date TBD: MSJ Hearing

15

In the event that Panasonic can facilitate the discovery of materials requested from Phillips

16

or otherwise obviate the need to use the Hague Convention, the court will consider a motion to

17

expedite this schedule.

18

It is so ordered.

19
20

DATED:_____9/20/12__

_________________________________

21

RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER REGARDING SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE—No. 12-00660 RMW

2