Brilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Comcast Corporation
ORDER Concerning Appointment of Special Master. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 2/18/2014. (klyon, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Action No. 13-cv-00886-REB-KMT
BRILLIANT OPTICAL SOLUTIONS, LLC,
COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
ORDER CONCERNING APPOINTMENT OF MASTER
This matter is before the court sua sponte. This patent infringement case concerns a
patent covering a fiber optic information transmission system, including a packet-based fiberoptic network. This case is at the point where the disputed claims in the patent in suit must be
construed applying the standards of Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370,
384-88 (1996) and its progeny.
The patent in suit concerns technology that is highly specialized and technical. Given
that circumstance, it is likely that a master with education and skill in the technical areas
addressed in the patent in suit will be able to construe the disputed claims in the patent more
accurately, more efficiently, and in a more timely fashion than a judge available on this court.
Under FED. R. CIV. P. 53(a)(1), these circumstances are sufficient to merit and permit the
appointment of a master.
Before appointing a master, the court must give the parties notice and an opportunity to
be heard. FED. R. CIV. P. 53(b)(1). This order shall serve as notice to the parties of the intent of
the court to appoint a master to construe the disputed claims of the patent in suit. This order
provides a schedule for the parties to state their positions on this issue and to suggest
candidates for the position of master.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That by March 4, 2014, each party SHALL FILE a brief addressing the question of
whether a master should be appointed to construe the disputed claims of the patent in suit;
2. That in its brief, each party SHALL STATE whether it consents to the appointment of
a master to construe the disputed claims of the patent in suit;
3. That in its brief, each party MAY SUGGEST one or more candidates for appointment
as a master and shall include a summary of the qualifications of any candidate;
4. That any party that supports the appointment of a master and/or consents to the
appointment of a master SHALL FILE a proposed order which appoints a master to construe
the disputed claims of the patent in suit and which contains the contents required under FED. R.
CIV. P. 53(b)(2)(A) - (E); and
5. That the proposed order SHALL BE included and filed in CM/ECF as an attachment
to the brief of the party submitting the proposed order and SHALL BE tendered separately to
the court in a Microsoft Word document via e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Dated February 18, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
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?