Media Digital, Inc. v. Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc.

Filing 45

PROCEDURAL ORDER: Cases 12cv313, 13cv57, 13cv166, 13cv167, 13cv168 consolidated for pretrial filings as outlined to docket 12cv313. Trial, final pretrial filings and any stipulations of dismissal shall be filed as outlined. Parties to confer and file a joint discovery proposal as outlined by June 24, 2013. So Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph N. Laplante.(jb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Media Digital, Inc.
v.
Toshiba America Information
Systems, Inc.

Civil No. 12-cv-00313-JL

Media Digital, Inc.
v.
Vizio, Inc.

Civil No. 13-cv-00057-JL

Media Digital, Inc.
v.
Huawei Technologies USA, Inc.

Civil No. 13-cv-00166-JL

Media Digital, Inc.
v.
Panasonic Corporation of North
America

Civil No. 13-cv-00167-JL

Media Digital, Inc.
v.
Viewsonic Corporation

Civil No. 13-cv-00168-JL

O R D E R
On March 26, 2013, this court issued an order consolidating
Media Digital, Inc. v. Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc.,
No. 12-cv-313 (the “main case”), with Media Digital, Inc. v.

Amazon.com, Inc., No. 13-cv-35, and Media Digital, Inc. v. Vizio,
Inc., No. 13-cv-57.

The court subsequently issued orders

inviting the parties to express their positions regarding the
consolidation of those three cases with Media Digital, Inc. v.
Huawei Technologies USA Inc., No. 13-cv-166, Media Digital, Inc.
v. Panasonic Corporation of North America, No. 13-cv-167, and
Media Digital, Inc. v. Viewsonic Corporation, No. 13-cv-168.
After due consideration of the parties’ submissions, the abovecaptioned cases will be consolidated for pretrial proceedings up
to and including summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 42.

Each case will be tried separately.

Media

Digital, Inc. v. Viewsonic Corporation, No. 13-cv-168, will be
reassigned to the undersigned judge.
So the consolidation is workable for both the parties and
the court, the parties shall continue to file dispositive motions
and their responses, as well as documents related to scheduling,
discovery, infringement, invalidity, and claim construction–including all filings required by this court’s Supplemental Rules
for Patent Cases–-on the docket for the main case, and the court
will observe the same practice.

If the cases remain unresolved

as trial approaches, trial and final pretrial filings, such as
those required by Local Rule 16.2, shall be filed solely on the
dockets for the individual cases to which they apply.

2

Any notice

of settlement or stipulation of dismissal shall be filed both in
the main case and in the individual case to which it applies.
The parties shall confer and, on or before June 24, 2013,
shall file a joint proposal for altering the discovery plan in
the main case (approved by the court on January 18, 2013) in
light of the consolidation.

If there are provisions on which the

parties are unable to reach agreement, their filing shall
identify the areas of disagreement and the parties’ competing
proposals; the court will not accept separate filings.

The

protective order in the main case, dated January 3, 2013, shall
remain in place following consolidation.

If any party wishes to

propose an alteration to that order, it shall raise that issue in
the parties’ joint proposal.
SO ORDERED.

____________________________
Joseph N. Laplante
United States District Judge
Dated:
cc:

June 3, 2013

Corby R. Vowell, Esq.
David K. Pinsonneault, Esq.
Doris Johnson Hines, Esq.
Haris Z. Bajwa, Esq.
Bryan K. Gould, Esq.
Philip R. Braley, Esq.
Laura L. Carroll, Esq.
Zachary Rush Gates, Esq.

3