Mindshare Technologies, Inc. et al v. Leger Metrics, Inc.

Filing 6

ORDER For Briefing On Markman Issues. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 5/16/2014. (klyon, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Robert E. Blackburn Civil Action No. 14-cv-01365-REB MINDSHARE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Utah corporation, and EMPATHICA, INC., a Canada corporation, Plaintiffs, vs. LEGER METRICS, INC., a Canada corporation, Defendant. ORDER FOR BRIEFING ON MARKMAN ISSUES Blackburn, J. This matter is before the court sua sponte. In this action for alleged patent infringement, the court recognizes the need first to construe the disputed claims of the patent in suit before the case can proceed to resolution by summary judgment, trial, or otherwise. Therefore, I establish the following briefing schedule to govern resolution of these matters. IT IS ORDERED as follows: 1. That no later than ninety days after the first answer or other response, e.g., motion to dismiss, etc., to the complaint is filed by the defendant, the parties SHALL FILE a joint claim construction statement setting forth the construction of claims and terms on which the parties agree and the construction of claims and terms on which the parties disagree for the patent in suit; 2. That absent further order of the court, the joint claim construction statement SHALL BE LIMITED to fifteen (15) pages; 3. That the plaintiffs’ brief on claim construction SHALL BE FILED 30 days after the joint claim construction statement is filed; 4. That the deadlines for filing a response brief and a reply brief, if any, SHALL BE AS PRESCRIBED by D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(d); 5. That absent further order of the court, the plaintiffs’ brief on claim construction and the defendant’s response brief SHALL BE LIMITED to twenty (20) pages; 6. That no later than ten (10) days after the reply brief is filed, the parties SHALL CONVENE a telephonic motions’ hearing setting conference with the court’s administrative assistant (303-335-2350) to set a time for a possible Markman1 hearing; provided, furthermore, that plaintiff is responsible for arranging, scheduling, and initiating the conference call, which must include representatives of all parties with authority to schedule matters in this case; and 7. That based on the parties’ submissions, the court will either rule on the papers, order further briefing, convene a Markman hearing, consider appointment of a master under Fed. R. Civ. P. 53, or take such further action as the court in its discretion deems proper and necessary. Dated May 16, 2014, at Denver, Colorado. BY THE COURT: 1 A reference to Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370, 384-88 (1996) 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?