National Institute for Strategic Technology Acquisition and Commercialization (NISTAC) v. Nissan North America, Inc. et al

Filing 84

AGREED ORDER regarding the declaration of Richard P. Baron. Documents 81 & 82 are held in abeyance. Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh (MBea)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR STRATEGIC
TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION (NISTAC),
Plaintiff
v.
NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC. et al.,
Defendants.

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 11-cv-11039-GCS-LJM
Hon. George C. Steeh
Magistrate Judge Laurie Michelson

AGREED ORDER REGARDING THE DECLARATION OF RICHARD P. BARON
Before the Court is the DECLARATION OF RICHARD P. BARON (“The Baron
Declaration”), submitted by Plaintiff in support of its Response Brief on Claim Construction
(D.I. 79-1); DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE THE BARON DECLARATION (D.I. 81);
and DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING SCHEDULE RE
MOTION TO STRIKE (D.I. 82).
After careful consideration of the parties’ submissions and arguments by counsel, and all
other related matters presented to the Court, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
(1) D.I. 81 and D.I. 82 are held in abeyance. The Baron Declaration will not be stricken
at this time and will be included as part of the record of the Claim Construction Hearing;
(2) The Court will not at this time, however, consider expert extrinsic evidence, including
the Baron Declaration, in construing the claim terms of the patents-in-suit that are in dispute. If,
after consideration of the parties’ respective Initial and Response (and Defendants’
Supplemental) Claim Construction Briefs and the parties’ arguments at the Claim Construction

1624905-EA 1

Hearing, the Court determines that reliance on expert extrinsic evidence is necessary in order to
construe the disputed claim terms, the Court will request the parties to meet and confer and
propose a procedure for addressing expert extrinsic evidence, including the Baron Declaration
and a proposed discovery plan;
(3) Plaintiff shall not call Richard P. Baron as a live witness at the Claim Construction
Hearing set for December 12, 2011; and
(4) By agreement of the parties, Defendants are granted leave to file a supplemental claim
construction brief to address issues first raised by Plaintiff in its Response Brief on Claim
Construction (D.I. 79).

IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/George Caram Steeh
United States District Judge
Dated: December 6, 2011

2