Tessera, Inc. v. Toshiba Corporation

Filing 253

ORDER RE 249 JOINT STATUS REPORT FOLLOWING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 11/29/2016. (blflc4S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/29/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 TESSERA, INC., Case No. 15-cv-02543-BLF Plaintiff, 8 v. 9 10 TOSHIBA CORPORATION, Defendant. ORDER RE JOINT STATUS REPORT FOLLOWING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE [Re: ECF 249] United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 On October 16, 2016, this Court granted in part Toshiba Corporation’s (“Toshiba”) motion 14 for summary judgment and denied Tessera, Inc.’s (“Tessera”) motion for partial summary 15 judgment. ECF 241. In its order, the Court held that the TCC License Agreement is an 16 infringement-based license that requires the payment of royalties only if Toshiba practices the 17 claims of the unexpired, valid, and enforceable licensed Tessera patents. Id. at 21. Therefore, to 18 prove breach of contract, Tessera must prove that Toshiba infringes or infringed the patents 19 covered by the contract. 20 The parties then appeared for a case management conference (“CMC”) to discuss the status 21 of the case on November 17, 2016. During the CMC, the Court confirmed Magistrate Judge 22 Nathanael Cousins’ ruling that the Patent Local Rules would apply to the discovery process in this 23 case. See ECF 243. The Court also ordered the parties to submit a joint statement concerning the 24 applicability of the Patent Local Rules. 25 Pursuant to the Court’s order, the parties submitted a joint status report concerning the 26 applicability of the Patent Local Rules. ECF 249. Although Tessera states that it does not intend 27 to present infringement contentions in the present contract litigation, Toshiba requests that the 28 Court set a deadline for Tessera to identify asserted patents and to provide disclosures pursuant to 1 Patent Local Rules 3-1 and 3-2. Id. at 2, 4. Given the status of the case, the Court will require 2 Tessera to identify any asserted patents and provide disclosures pursuant to Patent Local Rules 3-1 3 and 3-2 by no later than December 2, 2016. 4 Although Toshiba requests that the Court set the remainder of the deadlines under the 5 Patent Local Rules as “N/A,” the Court declines to do so as it is not precluding Tessera from 6 disclosing any patent infringement contentions. Thus, in the event that Tessera submits 7 infringement contentions by the December 2, 2016, deadline, then the Patent Local Rules will be 8 triggered and all of the time lines set forth therein will apply to this case. Insofar as Tessera has 9 indicated it does not intend to file infringement contentions, the Court will not, at this time, modify the trial date or any other dates set in the case schedule. Should Tessera disclose 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 infringement contentions, the parties may request further modification of the case schedule. 12 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 29, 2016 ______________________________________ BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?