Beneficial Innovations, Inc. v. Careerbuilder, LLC et al

Filing 140

Joint MOTION for Entry of Agreed Docket Control Order by Beneficial Innovations, Inc., Comcast Corporation, Disney Online, Google, Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., Morris Communications Company, LLC, NBC Universal, Inc., The New York Times Company, YouTube, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Smith, Melissa)

Beneficial Innovations, Inc. v. Careerbuilder, LLC et al

Doc. 140 Att. 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION BENEFICIAL INNOVATIONS, INC., Plaintiff, v. CAREERBUILDER, LLC, ET AL. Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § §

CASE NO. 2:09-CV-175-TJW Jury Trial Demanded

DOCKET CONTROL ORDER In accordance with the case status conference held herein on the 30th day of August 30, 2010, it is hereby ORDERED that the following schedule of deadlines is in effect until further order of this Court: September 4, 2012 August 20, 2012 Jury Selection - 9:00 a.m. in Marshall, Texas Final Pretrial Conference - 9:30 a.m. in Marshall, Texas The parties are ordered to meet and confer on their respective motions in limine and advise the court of any agreements in this regard by 3:00 p.m. the business day before the pretrial conference. The parties shall limit their motions in limine to those issues which, if improperly introduced into the trial of the case would be so prejudicial that the court could not alleviate the prejudice with appropriate instruction(s). August 6, 2012 July 23, 2012 July 23, 2012 Objections to Witnesses, Deposition Designations, and Exhibits contained in the Joint Final Pretrial Order and Counter-Deposition Designations due Joint Final Pretrial Order, Joint Proposed Jury Instructions and Form of the Verdict Motions in Limine due

Dockets.Justia.com

July 23, 2012

Notice of Request for Daily Transcript or Real Time Reporting of Court Proceedings. If a daily transcript or real time reporting of court proceedings is requested for trial, the party or parties making said request shall file a notice with the Court and e-mail the Court Reporter, Susan Simmons, at [e-mail]. Defendants to Identify Trial Witnesses Plaintiff to Identify Trial Witnesses Response to Dispositive Motions (including Daubert motions)1 Responses to dispositive motions filed prior to the dispositive motion deadline, including Daubert motions, shall be due in accordance with Local Rule CV-7(e). Motions for Summary Judgment shall comply with Local Rule CV56.

July 23, 2012 July 9, 2012 May 30, 2012

May 25, 2012 May 2, 2012 or 80 days after claim construction ruling (whichever is later) April 2, 2012 or 65 days after claim construction ruling (whichever is later) January 20, 2012 or 50 days after claim construction ruling (whichever is later) December 23, 2011 or 35 days after claim construction ruling (whichever is later)

Mediation to Be Completed Deadline for filing Dispositive Motions and any other motions that may require a hearing (including Daubert motions)

Discovery Deadline

Designate Rebuttal Expert Witnesses other than claims construction Rebuttal expert witness report due (Refer to Discovery Order for required information.) Party with the burden of proof to designate Expert Witnesses other than claims construction Expert witness report due (Refer to Discovery Order for required information.)

1

The parties are directed to Local Rule CV-7(d), which provides in part that "[i]n the event a party fails to oppose a motion in the manner prescribed herein, the court will assume that the party has no opposition." Local Rule CV-7(e) provides that a party opposing a motion has 12 days, in addition to any added time permitted under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(e), in which to serve and file a response and any supporting documents, after which the court will consider the submitted motion for decision.

-2-

November 23, 2011 or 30 days after claim construction ruling (whichever is later) October 19, 2011 or 15 days after claim construction ruling (whichever is later) September 27, 2011 September 16, 2011 August 19, 2011 August 12, 2011 August 11, 2011 July 29, 2011 July 14, 2011 June 14, 2011 June 13, 2011 June 3, 2011 May 23, 2011

Fact discovery deadline

Comply with P.R. 3-7 re: willfulness

Claim construction hearing 9:00 a.m., Marshall, Texas. Comply with P.R. 4-5(d) Comply with P.R. 4-5(c) Comply with P.R. 4-5(b) Parties to inform court if no disputes concerning privileged documents or information Comply with P.R. 4-5(a) Comply with P.R. 4-4 (Discovery deadline-claims construction issues) Comply with P.R. 4-3 Respond to Amended Pleadings Privilege Logs to be exchanged by parties Amend Pleadings (It is not necessary to file a Motion for Leave to Amend before the deadline to amend pleadings except to the extent the amendment seeks to add a new patent in suit. It is necessary to file a Motion for Leave to Amend after the amended pleadings date set forth herein.) Join Additional Parties Comply with P.R. 4-2 Comply with P.R. 4-1 Comply with P.R. 3-3 and 3-4 Comply with P.R. 3-1 and 3-2

May 23, 2010 May 16, 2011 April 25, 2011 April 1, 2011 December 1, 2010

-3-

OTHER LIMITATIONS 1. All depositions to be read into evidence as part of the parties' case-in-chief shall be EDITED so as to exclude all unnecessary, repetitious, and irrelevant testimony; ONLY those portions which are relevant to the issues in controversy shall be read into evidence. The Court will refuse to entertain any motion to compel discovery filed after the date of this Order unless the movant advises the Court within the body of the motion that counsel for the parties have first conferred in a good faith attempt to resolve the matter. See Eastern District of Texas Local Rule CV-7(h). The following excuses will not warrant a continuance nor justify a failure to comply with the discovery deadline: (a) (b) The fact that there are motions for summary judgment or motions to dismiss pending; The fact that one or more of the attorneys is set for trial in another court on the same day, unless the other setting was made prior to the date of this order or was made as a special provision for the parties in the other case; The failure to complete discovery prior to trial, unless the parties can demonstrate that it was impossible to complete discovery despite their good faith effort to do so.

2.

3.

(c)

-4-