HVAC Technology LLC v. Southland Industries

Filing 24

CASE SCHEDULING ORDER. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on September 22, 2015, re 22 . (psglc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/22/2015)

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

HVAC TECHNOLOGY LLC,
Plaintiff,

12
v.

13
14

SOUTHLAND INDUSTRIES,
Defendant.

15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 5:15-cv-02934-PSG
CASE SCHEDULING ORDER
(Re: Docket No. 22)

16
Based on the parties’ joint case management statement1 and case management conference,

17

IT IS ORDERED that the following limits on discovery shall apply to this case, as set forth

18
19

in the parties’ joint case management statement:2

20



21


22
23



24
25



26

Each party shall be entitled to propound no more than 25 interrogatories, including all
discrete subparts, absent agreement of the other party or leave of court, pursuant to Fed.
R. Civ. P. 33.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)(1), depositions shall be limited to seven hours of live
deposition testimony time per day, although the total time including breaks may exceed
seven hours.
The fact that a witness may have been designated and deposed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
P. 30(b)(6) does not preclude that witness from being deposed in his/her individual
capacity, and vice versa.
No fixed limit is currently ordered on the number of requests for production of
documents or requests for admission that may be propounded by a party.

27

1

See Docket No. 22.

28

2

See Docket No. 22 at ¶ 8.
1

Case No. 5:15-cv-02934-PSG
CASE SCHEDULING ORDER

1



2

o Robert P. Andris and Michael D. Kanach for Southland Industries at:
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
with a copy to
[e-mail]

3
4
5
6

o Mark D. Marrello for HVAC Technology LLC at:
[e-mail]
with a copy to
[e-mail]

7
8
9

Discovery-related documents shall be served electronically, and documents to be
served, but not filed through ECF, need only be served by emailing scanned versions of
the documents to:

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that for discovery disputes that may arise, the parties shall

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
proceed according to the following procedure. If the dispute cannot be resolved by an in-person
11
12
13

meet-and-confer, the parties may within five days of the meeting submit a five-page joint letter
with a one-page cover. Letter briefs must comply with the following requirements:


21

The cover page must contain the parties’ names, one line summarizing the nature of the
dispute, and an attestation that the parties have met and conferred in person. If the
parties have met telephonically, the cover page must contain the reasons for the
telephone meeting.
Within the five pages, the parties shall include a joint statement of the facts necessary
for the court to render its decision. Each party shall provide summaries of the disputes,
the appropriate legal authority, and each party’s final proposed compromise. To
enhance ease of comparison, parties are encouraged to use tables and charts
summarizing their arguments.
The letter brief shall be written in Times New Roman, twelve-point font. Margins shall
be no less than one inch on each side. The briefs may be single-spaced.
Parties shall file the joint letter brief under the Civil Events category of “Motions and
Related Filings  Motions – General  Discovery Letter Brief.”

22

Although parties may present more than one dispute in the joint letter brief, there is no limit

14
15
16



17
18
19



20



23
24

to the number of letter briefs they may file. If multiple disputes require multiple letter briefs, the
parties are encouraged to use as many as necessary to provide the court with well-supported

25
26
27
28

arguments. A single dispute, however, is permitted only one joint letter brief. Attempts to
circumvent this limit will be viewed with disfavor. Upon review of the joint letter brief, the court
will advise the parties how it intends to proceed. The court may take the dispute under submission,
2
Case No. 5:15-cv-02934-PSG
CASE SCHEDULING ORDER

1
2

hold a telephone conference with the parties, order a hearing or further briefing, or require the
parties to appear at the courthouse for further meet-and-confer.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following schedule and deadlines shall apply to this

3
4

case:

5
6
7

Plaintiff’s preliminary infringement contentions and document production .......... Oct. 6, 2015
Defendant’s preliminary invalidity contentions and document production ......... Nov. 20, 2015
Exchange of proposed terms and claim elements for construction ........................ Dec. 4, 2015

8
Exchange of preliminary claim constructions and extrinsic evidence ................. Dec. 18, 2015
9
Deadline for motions to add parties or amend pleadings ...................................... Jan. 13, 2016
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Joint claim construction and prehearing statement ............................................... Jan. 19, 2016
Completion of claim construction discovery, including experts ........................... Feb. 18, 2016
Plaintiff’s opening claim construction brief ........................................................... Mar. 4, 2016
Defendant’s responsive claim construction brief ................................................. Mar. 18, 2016
Plaintiff’s reply claim construction brief .............................................................. Mar. 25, 2016
Claim construction hearing......................................................................................Apr. 8, 2016
Plaintiff’s final infringement contentions ............................................................... May 6, 2016
Defendant’s advice of counsel document production ............................................ June 8, 2016

18

Completion of fact discovery ................................................................................ July 19, 2016

19

Service of expert reports on issues for which

20

a party bears burden of proof under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) ................................ July 31, 2016

21

Rebuttal expert reports ......................................................................................... Aug. 31, 2016

22

Close of expert discovery ..................................................................................... Sept. 30, 2016

23

Deadline for hearing dispositive motions ............................................................. Nov. 15, 2016

24

Deadline for private mediation ............................................................................. Nov. 25, 2016

25

Pretrial conference statement ................................................................................. Dec. 2, 2016

26

Pretrial conference ................................................................................................ Dec. 13, 2016

27

Jury trial ................................................................................................................... Jan. 3, 2016

28
3
Case No. 5:15-cv-02934-PSG
CASE SCHEDULING ORDER

1
2

SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 22, 2015

3

_________________________________
PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge

4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Case No. 5:15-cv-02934-PSG
CASE SCHEDULING ORDER