ARRIVALSTAR S.A. et al v. USA

Filing 19

SCHEDULING ORDER: The parties shall file a joint motion proposing an order governing the use of electronic discovery and a protective order due by 7/9/2012. The parties shall have a meeting of counsel to discuss issues relating to their preparation of claim charts due by 8/10/12. Plaintiffs shall serve on defendant its Claim Chart and its Proposed Claim Construction Statement due by 8/24/12. Defendant shall serve on plaintiffs its Response Chart and its Response to Proposed Claim Construction Statement due by 9/28/12. The parties shall meet and confer and thereafter file a "Joint Claim Construction Statement" due by 10/22/12.Opening Briefs due by 11/16/2012. Response due by 12/14/2012. Fact Discovery due by 3/29/2013. Expert Discovery due by 6/28/2013. Signed by Judge Francis M. Allegra. (si) Copy to parties.

In The United States Court of Federal Claims
No. 11-784C
(Filed: June 8, 2012)
__________
ARRIVALSTAR S.A. and
MELVINO TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,
Plaintiffs,
v.
THE UNITED STATES,
Defendant.
__________
ORDER
__________
Today, a status conference was held in this case. As agreed upon by the parties at this
conference, the court hereby orders the following:
1.

On or before July 9, 2012, the parties shall file a joint motion proposing an
order governing the use of electronic discovery and a protective order.
Should the parties be unable to reach agreement on either of these matters,
the motion must indicate with specificity what the disagreements are,
including, if appropriate, the language at issue;

2.

On or before August 10, 2012, the parties shall have a meeting of counsel
to discuss issues relating to their preparation of claim charts;

3.

On or before August 24, 2012, plaintiffs shall serve on defendant its
“Claim Chart” and its “Proposed Claim Construction Statement;”

4.

Plaintiffs’ Claim Chart referenced in paragraph 3 must contain the
following information for each Asserted Claim:
a.

The identity of each apparatus, product, device, process, method,
act or other instrumentality that allegedly infringes the Asserted
Claim;

b.

Whether such infringement is claimed to be literal or under the
doctrine of equivalents;

c.

d.

5.

Where each element of each infringed claim is found within each
apparatus, product, device, process, method, act or other
instrumentality; and
If plaintiffs wish to preserve the right to rely on their own
apparatus, product, device, process, method, act or other
instrumentality as evidence of commercial success, plaintiffs must
identify, separately for each claim, each such apparatus, product,
device, process, method, act or other instrumentality that
incorporates or reflects that particular claim.

The Proposed Claim Construction Statement referenced in paragraph 3
shall contain the following information:
a.

The preferred interpretation of any claim term or phrase;

b.

An identification of all support for that interpretation found in the
claims themselves, the specification, and prosecution history; and

c.

An identification of any extrinsic evidence (including but not
limited to expert testimony) that plaintiffs intend to use to support
their proposed interpretation.

6.

On or before September 28, 2012, defendant shall serve on plaintiffs its
“Response Chart” and its “Response to Proposed Claim Construction
Statement;”

7.

The Response Chart referenced in paragraph 6 shall include the following
information:
a.

b.

Whether each item of prior art anticipates the claim or renders it
obvious;

c.

Where each element of the claim is found within each item of prior
art; and

d.
8.

The identity of each item of prior art that anticipates the claim or
renders it obvious;

All grounds of invalidity other than anticipation or obviousness.

The Response to Proposed Claim Construction Statement referenced in
paragraph 6 shall contain the following information:
a.

The preferred interpretation of any claim term or phrase;

-2-

b.

c.

9.

An identification of all support for that interpretation found in the
claims themselves, the specification, and prosecution history; and
An identification of any extrinsic evidence (including but not
limited to expert testimony) that defendant intends to use to
support its proposed interpretation.

On or before October 22, 2012, the parties shall meet and confer and
thereafter file a “Joint Claim Construction Statement.” The Joint Claim
Construction Statement shall contain the following information:
a.

The construction of those claims and terms on which the parties
agree; and

b.

Each party’s proposed construction of each disputed claim and
term.

10.

On or before November 16, 2012, the parties shall file opening briefs on
claim construction. The briefs should indicate whether the parties intend
to use expert testimony at the Markman hearing;

11.

On or before December 14, 2012, the parties shall file briefs in response to
the opening claim construction briefs;

12.

The parties shall append to their filings in paragraphs 10 and 11 any
supporting evidence, including records of prior judicial or agency
proceedings relative to the claims in this case;

13.

The court will schedule a Markman hearing shortly after the close of
briefing;

14.

Fact discovery shall conclude on March 29, 2013; and

15.

Expert discovery shall begin on March 30, 2013 and conclude on June 28,
2013.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Francis M. Allegra
Francis M. Allegra
Judge

-3-