Konami Gaming Inc. v. PTT, LLC

Filing 97

ORDER Granting 96 Stipulation to Amend the Joint Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order and to Extend Time re 92 Motion for Summary Judgment. ( Responses due by 12/2/2016., Replies due by 12/16/2016.) Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 11/7/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PLLC

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PLLC
Robert Hernquist (Nevada Bar No. 10616)
Wells Fargo Tower, Suite 1000
3800 Howard Hughes Parkway
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169-5980
Telephone: [phone] | Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Patrick M. McCarthy (Michigan Bar No. P49100) (admitted pro hac vice)
2950 S. State Street, Suite 360
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104-1475
Telephone: [phone] | Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Kristopher K. Hulliberger (Michigan Bar No. P66903) (admitted pro hac vice)
Christopher J. Worrel (Michigan Bar No. P75441) (admitted pro hac vice)
450 West Fourth Street
Royal Oak, Michigan 48067-2557
Telephone: [phone] | Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff Konami Gaming, Inc.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
KONAMI GAMING, INC., a Nevada
Case No.: 2:14-CV-01483-RFB-NJK
corporation,
Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant
JOINT STIPULATION TO AMEND
THE JOINT STIPULATED
v.
DISCOVERY PLAN AND
SCHEDULING ORDER AND TO
HIGH 5 GAMES, LLC, a Delaware limited
EXTEND TIME
liability company,
Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff
(Third Request)

19
20

Pursuant to Local Rules LR IA 6-1 and LR 26-4, Plaintiff Konami Gaming, Inc. (“Konami”

21

or “Plaintiff”) and Defendant High 5 Games, LLC (“High 5” or “Defendant”) hereby stipulate for

22

the extension of time (1) to file Konami’s Reply Claim Construction Brief, presently scheduled

23

for October 28, 2016; (2) to file Konami’s Response to High 5’s Motion for Summary Judgment,

24

presently scheduled for November 14, 2016; and (3) to file High 5’s Reply in support of their

25
26
27
28

Motion for Summary Judgment, presently anticipated for November 21, 2016.
WHEREAS, the parties to this action filed a proposed Joint Discovery Plan and
Scheduling Order (“Scheduling Order”) on March 13, 2015 (Docket No. 25);

1
2

WHEREAS, the Court denied the proposed Scheduling Order on March 16, 2015 (Docket
No. 26);

3
4

WHEREAS, the parties filed a revised proposed Scheduling Order on March 30, 2015
(Docket No. 29);

5

WHEREAS, the Court so ordered the Scheduling Order on April 2, 2015 (Docket No. 32);

6

WHEREAS, the parties stipulated to stay discovery and Claim Construction Deadlines on

7

September 14, 2015;

8

WHEREAS, the Court so ordered the stay on September 18, 2015 (Docket No. 43);

9

WHEREAS, the parties filed a further amended proposed Scheduling Order on September

10

22, 2015 (Docket No. 45);

HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PLLC

11
12

WHEREAS, the Court so order the Scheduling Order on September 23, 2015 (Docket No.
46);

13
14

WHEREAS, the parties stipulated for the extension of time for discovery deadlines on
November 11, 2015 (Docket No. 51);

15
16
17
18
19
20

WHEREAS, the Court so order the Scheduling Order on November 12, 2015 (Docket No.
52);
WHEREAS, the parties have completed disclosure of infringement and non-infringement
contentions and are currently engaging in ongoing fact discovery;
WHEREAS, the claim construction process is on-going and the parties have not yet
completed expert discovery;

21

WHEREAS, counsel for the Konami has out-of-state court hearings during the week of

22

October 31st that requires extensive preparation this week and counsel has a trial out-of-state during

23

the week of November 15, all of which impacts the ability to timely complete the briefing;

24
25

WHEREAS, counsel for the parties have met and conferred, recognizing the complexity
of the claim construction and summary judgment issues outstanding before the Court;

26

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the undersigned

27

counsel for the named parties hereto, that the Scheduling Order and the motion response deadlines

28

shall be amended as follows:
2

1
Event
2
3
4
5
6
7

Proposed Date

Konami’s Reply Claim Construction Brief
(LR 1-16)

November 11, 2016

Konami’s Response to High 5’s Motion for
Summary Judgement (Docket No. 92)

December 2, 2016

High 5’s Reply in support of High 5’s
Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No.
92)

December 16, 2016

8

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that nothing herein alters the

9

obligations and requirements in the Scheduling Order and that this Stipulation is made in good

10
HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PLLC

11

faith and not for the purpose of delay.
IT IS SO STIPULATED THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD,

12

Dated: October 25, 2016

Dated: October 25, 2016

13

By: /s/Robert Hernquist

By: /s/Robert C. Ryan

14

18

HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS
Robert Hernquist
Nevada Bar No. 10616
Patrick M. McCarthy
Michigan Bar P49100, admitted pro hac vice
Kristopher K. Hulliberger
Michigan Bar P66903, admitted pro hac vice
Christopher J. Worrel
Michigan Bar P75441, admitted pro hac vice

HOLLAND & HART LLP
Robert C. Ryan, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 7164
Ryan A. Loosvelt, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 8550
Christopher B. Hadley, Esq.
(admitted pro hac vice)
Teague I. Donahey
(admitted pro hac vice)

19

Attorneys for Plaintiff Konami Gaming

Attorney’s for Defendant High 5 Games

15
16
17

20
21

ORDER

22

PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED:

23

11/7/16
Dated: _____________________

IT IS SO ORDERED:

24

_______________________________________

25

__________________________
Nancy J. Koppe

26

RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
United States Magistrate Judge
United States District Judge

27
28
3