Viva Healthcare Packaging Ltd et al v. CTL Packaging USA Inc et al

Filing 285

ORDER directing the Clerk to calendar the following motions for oral argument on the next available Charlotte civil motions day re 184 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Certain Opinions by Expert Witness Stephen Driscoll, 196 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment of No Anticipation of United States Patent No. 6,547,094, 208 MOTION to Exclude Certain Purported Expert Testimony of Cynthia Smith and Tim Osswald , 178 MOTION for Summary J udgment as to Indefiniteness, 203 MOTION to Exclude Purported Expert Testimony of Cynthia Smith , 182 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment of No Willful Infringement, 198 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment of No Anticipation of United States Patent No. 8,518,318, 190 MOTION to Exclude Certain Purported Expert Testimony of Tim Osswald and Mukerrem Cakmak , 212 Objection to Magistrate Judge's Decision (Rule 72(a)) re 176 Orde r on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief , 180 MOTION for Summary Judgment as to Enablement, 186 MOTION in Limine To Exclude Certain Testimony by Expert Witness Michael Rubinstein, 214 Sealed Document,,. Signed by District Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr on 3/25/16. (clc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. 3:13-cv-00569-MOC-DSC
VIVA HEALTHCARE PACKAGING USA INC.;
VIVA HEALTHCARE PACKAGING HK LTD;
and VIVA HEALTHCARE PACKAGING LTD,
Plaintiffs,
Vs.
CTL PACKAGING USA INC. and TUBOPLAST
HISPANIA,
Defendants.

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

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the court on the following motions, all of which have been
fully briefed and are ripe for review:
1. Defendants CTL Packaging USA, Inc. and Tuboplast Hispania’s (“Defendants”)
Motion for Summary Judgment as to Indefiniteness (#178);
2. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment as to Lack of Enablement (#180);
3. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of No Willful Infringement (#182);
4. Plaintiffs Viva Healthcare Packaging Ltd., Viva Healthcare Packing (HK) Ltd., and Viva
Healthcare Packing (USA), Inc.’s (“Plaintiffs”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
of No Anticipation of United States Patent No. 6,547,094 (#196);
5. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of No Anticipation Of United States
Patent No. 8,518,318 (#198);
6. Plaintiffs’ Objections (#212) to Magistrate Judge Cayer’s February 8, 2016 Order
(#176) denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Relief from Protective Order;
7. Plaintiffs’ Objections (#214) to the Magistrate Judge’s February 9, 2016 Order (#177)
denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Production of Documents;

-1-

8. Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Certain Opinions by Expert Witness Stephen Driscoll
(#184);
9. Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Certain Testimony of Expert Dr. Michael Rubinstein
(#186);
10. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude Certain Purported Expert Testimony of Tim Osswald
and Mukerrem Cakman (#190);
11. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude Purported Expert Testimony of Cynthia Smith (#203);
and
12. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude Purported Expert Testimony of Cynthia Smith and Tim
Osswald (#208).
Having considered the above matters and reviewed the pleadings, the court finds that oral
arguments would be beneficial to efficient resolution of all motions, and therefore enters the
following Order.
ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Clerk of Court calendar all of the above
motions for oral argument on the next available Charlotte civil motions day, blocking out three
hours. Counsel is advised to prepare arguments within the stated time limit, though the court may
allow additional time as needed for the parties to fully make their presentations.

Signed: March 25, 2016

-2-