Rothschild Digital Media Innovations, LLC v. Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC

Filing 52

CASE SCHEDULING ORDER re 51 Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on November 19, 2014 (psglc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/19/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SAN JOSE DIVISION United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 ROTHSCHILD DIGITAL MEDIA INNOVATIONS, LLC, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 v. SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA LLC, Defendant. 16 17 18 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 5:14-cv-03928-PSG CASE SCHEDULING ORDER (Re: Docket No. 51) Based on the parties’ joint case management statement and the case management conference on November 18, 2014, 1 19 IT IS ORDERED that the presumptive limits on discovery set forth in the Federal Rules of 20 21 Civil Procedure shall apply to this case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the deadline for joinder of any additional parties, or other 22 23 amendments to the pleadings, is 120 days after entry of this order. 24 25 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that discovery in this case will not be stayed pending claim construction; rather the parties will proceed with all discovery concurrently. 26 27 1 28 See Docket No. 49. 1 Case No. 5:14-cv-03928-PSG CASE SCHEDULING ORDER IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties participate in mediation following claim 1 2 construction. The parties shall contact the ADR Unit within 7 days of the Markman Hearing to 3 choose the panel mediator and make the necessary arrangements. 4 5 6 7 8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following schedule and deadlines shall apply to this case: Initial Case Management Conference ......................................................... November 18, 2014 RDMI’s Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions ..... December 16, 2014 SCEA’s Disclosure of Invalidity Contentions ............................................... February 19, 2015 Exchange of List of Claim Terms to Be Construed by Court ............................. March 9, 2015 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 9 Exchange of Proposed Constructions of Each Term to Be Construed .................. April 2, 2015 11 Joint Claim Construction and Pre-Hearing Statement............................................ June 4, 2015 12 Claim Construction Discovery Deadline (including experts) ................................. July 7, 2015 13 Initial Markman Brief ............................................................................................ July 20, 2015 14 Opposition to Markman Brief ............................................................................ August 6, 2015 15 Reply re Markman Brief ................................................................................... August 17, 2015 16 Markman Hearing .......................................................................................... September 2, 2015 17 Deadline to Designate Infringement Experts .............................................. September 20, 2015 18 Initial Expert Reports .................................................................................. November 20, 2015 19 Rebuttal Expert Reports .................................................................................... January 8, 2016 20 Discovery Cut-Off .......................................................................................... February 8, 2016 21 Deadline to File Opening Dispositive Motion............................................... February 23, 2016 22 Dispositive Motions Hearing ............................................................................. March 22, 2016 23 Pre-Trial Conference .............................................................................................. May 3, 2016 24 Jury Trial .......................................................................................... May 16, 2016 at 9:30 AM 25 26 27 28 2 Case No. 5:14-cv-03928-PSG CASE SCHEDULING ORDER

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?