Dot Hill Systems Corp. v. Crossroads Systems, Inc.

Filing 27

ORDER CONCERNING APPOINTMENT OF MASTER. That by September 30, 2015, each party shall file a brief addressing the question whether a master should be appointed to construe the disputed claims of the patent-in-suit and to manage related discovery and other matters. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 8/26/2015. (mlace, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Action No. 15-cv-01380-REB-KMT
DOT HILL SYSTEMS CORP.,
Plaintiff,
v.
CROSSROADS SYSTEMS, INC.,
Defendants.

ORDER CONCERNING APPOINTMENT OF MASTER
Blackburn, J.
This matter is before the court sua sponte. This patent infringement case
concerns Unites States Patent No. 7,277,995, a patent for a storage controller that
provides controlled access to storage devices by host computers. This case is ripe for
the construction of disputed claims 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. It
is likely that a master with education and skill in the technical areas of the patent-in-suit
will be able to construe the disputed claims more accurately, efficaciously, and
expeditiously than a judge of this court. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(a)(1), these
circumstances are sufficient to warrant 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 court’s intent 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 September 30, 2015, each party shall file a brief addressing the
question whether a master should be appointed to construe the disputed claims of the
patent-in-suit and to manage related discovery and other matters;
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 and to manage related
discovery and other matters;
3. That in its brief, each party may suggest one or more candidates for
appointment as a master and shall include a curriculum vitae of the qualifications of any
candidate;
4. That any party that supports and 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 to manage related discovery and other matters and which
contains the contents required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(b)(2)(A)-(E); and
5. That the proposed order shall be 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
[e-mail].

2

Dated August 26, 2015, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

3