Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Filing 957

Joint MOTION to Vacate the Schedule and for Case Management Conference at the August 31, 2011 Hearing by Adobe Systems Incorporated, Amazon.com Inc., CDW Corporation, Citigroup Inc., Eolas Technologies Incorporated, Google Inc., J.C. Penney Company, Inc., Staples, Inc., The Go Daddy Group, Inc., Yahoo! Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Healey, David)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION

EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES
INCORPORATED,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
ADOBE SYSTEMS INC, et al.,
DEFENDANTS.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Civil Action No. 6:09-CV-446-LED

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

PLAINTIFF’S AND SEVERAL DEFENDANTS’ JOINT MOTION TO VACATE
THE SCHEDULE AND FOR CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AT THE
AUGUST 31, 2011 HEARING
Plaintiff, Eolas Technologies Incorporated (“Eolas”), and Several of the
Defendants herein, Adobe Systems, Inc., Amazon, Inc., CDW, Citigroup, Inc., Go-Daddy,
Inc., Google, Inc., J.C. Penny, Inc., Staples, Inc., and Yahoo, Inc., jointly move to vacate
the schedule (including pretrial and trial date); to vacate all other due dates and deadlines
pending amendment of the scheduling order; and to put on the regular briefing schedule
under Local Rule 7 the Plaintiff’s Motion to Join the Regents of the University of
California. These Moving Parties also move for a case management conference to be held
at the August 31, 2011 hearing. In connection with the requested relief, the Parties state
the following:
1.

Statement by Eolas: Eolas plans to file a Motion for Reconsideration or
In The Alternative, Certification for Interlocutory Appeal, on the
1

construction of “executable application.” Additionally, Eolas may amend
its infringement contentions under the Local Patent Rule 3.6 and
supplement its expert report(s) accordingly. Eolas does not seek to relitigate claim construction or re-open fact discovery or expert reports
generally.
2.

Statement by Defendants: Defendants will oppose any inappropriate
requests by Plaintiff for amendment of contentions or motion to supplement
expert reports, as well as the re-opening of fact discovery as to Defendants,
re-litigating claim construction, and/or adding new products to the case.1
Defendants have conferred with Plaintiff on Plaintiff’s Motion for
Reconsideration of “executable application” and generally oppose it.
Defendants are considering Eolas’ request for Interlocutory Appeal and,
should there be such an appeal, the appropriate scope of the appeal. Each
Defendant reserves its right to evaluate and consent to, or contest, any
issue, and to raise its own issues as required.

3.

Moving Parties agree that under these circumstances a September 22, 2011
pretrial conference, and an October 2011 trial, no longer appear realistic.
The Moving Parties ask that the remainder of the current schedule be
vacated; that all pending deadlines for motions, answers or other filings in

1

Some Defendants believe that any amendment of contentions or expert reports or
additional discovery by Eolas is not warranted here. However, Defendants will meet and
confer in good faith on any motion or request by any party. This is a general response to
the Statement by Eolas.
2

this Court be stayed pending a new case management plan; and that the
remaining briefing on the pending Motion for Joinder of the Regents of the
University of California be put on the regular Local Rule 7 briefing
schedule.
4.

The Moving Parties ask the Court to discuss at the August 31, 2011 hearing
a plan to bring this litigation to a conclusion without generally re-opening
discovery, issued Orders or any other deadlines that have passed.

5.

The Moving Parties have agreed to work together to submit such a revised
schedule and case management plan to the Court within two weeks of the
hearing, with the benefit of guidance from the Court, which generally does
not re-open pleading, discovery or motion deadlines already passed, except
for specific points the Parties may agree on or that the Court may order for
good cause shown.

The parties request that, at the August 31, 2011 hearing, the Court discuss and, to
the extent practical, prudent and possible, provide guidance as follows:
1.

Determine from discussion with the Parties which pending Motions, if any,
may still proceed regardless of claim construction (e.g., Weinstein and Bari
Daubert Motion, License Motions, etc.), while suspending briefing on
remaining Motions.

2.

The Court might also explore with the Parties potential trial dates and trial
staging.

3

3.

If the Court vacates the schedule, the pending Motion regarding resetting
deadlines for Frito-Lay may be moot depending on the rulings and
guidance from the Court.

4.

If the Court puts Eolas’ Motion to Join the Regents on the regular Local
Rule 7 briefing schedule as requested, argument on this Motion will not be
needed on August 31, and a normal briefing schedule may permit
resolution of this issue.
CONCLUSION

Wherefore the Movants ask that the Court grant the relief requested in this Motion.

4

Respectfully submitted,
By:
/s/ James R. Batchelder by permission
James R. Batchelder (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
Sasha G. Rao (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
Mark D. Rowland
[e-mail]
Brandon Stroy (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
Rebecca R. Hermes (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
Hart Xu (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
ROPES & GRAY LLP
1900 University Avenue, 6th Floor
East Palo Alto, California 94303-2284
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Michael E. Jones (Bar No. 10929400)
[e-mail]
Allen F. Gardner (Bar No. 24043679)
[e-mail]
POTTER MINTON
A Professional Corporation
110 N. College, Suite 500
Tyler, TX 75702
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
GOOGLE, INC. AND YOUTUBE, LLC

/s/ David J. Healey
David J. Healey
[e-mail]
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
1221 McKinney Street, Suite 2800
Houston, TX 77010
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Jason W. Wolff
[e-mail]
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
12390 E1 Camino Real
San Diego, CA 92130
Telephone: [phone]
5

Frank E. Scherkenbach
[e-mail]

6

Proshanto Mukherji
[e-mail]
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
One Marina Park Drive
Boston, MA 02110
Telephone: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED
/s/Jennifer H. Doan, by permission
Jennifer H. Doan
[e-mail]
Joshua R. Thane
[e-mail]
Haltom & Doan
6500 Summerhill Road, Suite 100
Texarkana, TX 75503
Telephone: [phone]
Edward R. Reines
Andrew Perito
Aaron Y. Huang
Weil Gotshal & Manges
201 Redwood Shores Parkway
Redwood City, CA 94065 650.802.3000
[e-mail] [e-mail]
[e-mail] [e-mail]
Christian Hurt
Weil Gotshal & Manges
700 Louisiana, Suite 1600
Houston, TX 77002
713.546.5000
christian.hurt@weft .coin
Attorneys for Defendants
AMAZON.COM INC.
/s/ Thomas L. Duston by permission
Thomas L. Duston
Julianne Hartzell
Scott A. Sanderson
Anthony S. Gabrielson
Marshall Gerstein & Borun
233 S. Wacker Drive
7

6300 Willis Tower
Chicago, IL 60606
312.474.6300 [e-mail]
[e-mail] [e-mail]
[e-mail]
Eric Hugh Findlay
Brian Craft
Findlay Craft
6760 Old Jacksonville Highway Suite 101
Tyler, TX 75703
903.534.1100 [e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
CDW LLC
/s/ Edwin R. DeYoung by permission
Edwin R. DeYoung
Roger Brian Cowie
Galyn Dwight Gafford
Michael Scott Fuller
Roy William Hardin
Jason E. Mueller
Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell LLP
2200 Ross Ave.
Suite 2200
Dallas, TX 75201
214.740.8500
[e-mail] [e-mail]
[e-mail] [e-mail]
[e-mail] [e-mail]
Eric L. Sophir
SNR Denton
1301 K Street, N.W.
Suite 600, East Tower
Washington, DC 20005-3364
202.408.6470
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
CITIGROUP INC.

/s/ Thomas M. Melsheimer, by persmission
8

Thomas M. Melsheimer
Neff J. McNabnay
Carl Bruce
Fish & Richardson PC
1717 Main Street
Suite 5000
Dallas, TX 75201
214.474.5070
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Proshanto Mukherji
Fish & Richardson PC
225 Franklin Street
Boston, MA 02110
617.542.5070
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
THE GO DADDY GROUP, INC.

/s/ Christopher M. Joe, by permission
Christopher M. Joe
Brian Carpenter
Eric W. Buether
Buether Joe & Carpenter
1700 Pacific, Suite 2390
Dallas, TX 75201
214-466-1270
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
J.C. PENNEY CORPORATION, INC.
/s/ Michael Ernest Richardson, by permission
Michael Ernest Richardson
Beck Redden & Secrest
1221 McKinney
Suite 4500
Houston, TX 77010
9

713.951.6284
[e-mail]
Kate Hutchins
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, LLP
399 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10022
212.230.8800
[e-mail]
Donald R. Steinberg
Mark Matuschak
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, LLP
60 State Street
Boston, MA 02109
617.526.5000 [e-mail]
[e-mail]
Daniel V. Williams
Jonathan Hardt
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, LLP
1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C.
20006
202.663.6012
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
STAPLES, INC.

10

/s/ Jennifer H. Doan, by Permission
Jennifer H. Doan
Joshua R. Thane
Haltom & Doan
6500 Summerhill Road, Suite 100
Texarkana, TX 75503
903.255.1000
[e-mail] [e-mail]
Edward R. Reines
Andrew Perito
Aaron Y. Huang
Weil Gotshal & Manges
201 Redwood Shores Parkway
Redwood City, CA 94065
650.802.3000
[e-mail] [e-mail]
[e-mail] [e-mail]
Christian Hurt
Weil Gotshal & Manges
700 Louisiana, Suite 1600
Houston, TX 77002 713.546.5000
[e-mail]
Deborah J Race
Otis W Carroll, Jr.
Ireland Carroll & Kelley
6101 S Broadway
Suite 500
Tyler, TX 75703
903.561.1600
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
YAHOO! INC.

11

/s/ Mike McKool, by Permission
Mike McKool
Lead Attorney
Texas State Bar No. 13732100
[e-mail]
Douglas Cawley
Texas State Bar No. 04035500
[e-mail]
Luke McLeroy
Texas State Bar No. 24041455
[e-mail]
MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500
Dallas, Texas 75201
Telephone: [phone]
Telecopier: [phone]
Sam F. Baxter
Texas State Bar No. 01938000
[e-mail]
MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
104 e. Houston St., Ste. 300
P.O. Box O
Marshall,. Texas 75670
Telephone: [phone]
Telecopier: [phone]
Kevin L. Burgess
Texas State Bar No. 24006927
[e-mail]
Steven J. Pollinger”Texas State Bar No. 24011919
[e-mail]
MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
300 West Sixth Street, Suite 1700
Austin, Texas 78701
Telephone: [phone]
Telecopier: [phone]
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

12

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
I certify that all parties have conferred on this Plaintiff’s and Several Defendants’ Joint
Motion to Vacate the Schedule and For Case Management Conference at the August 31,
2011 Hearing.
Frito-Lay Inc. opposes this motion and says “Frito-Lay is not joining this motion
because it has filed a motion for a separate trial based, inter alia, on its statement that
severance of the claims against Frito-Lay is appropriate and Eolas' and Frito-Lay's need
to take discovery, serve expert reports, file amended pleadings and complete other
pretrial tasks that occurred while the action was stayed between Eolas and Frito-Lay.”

/s/ David. J. Healey
David Healey

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that all parties were served through their counsel via ECF on this 31st Day of
August, 2011.
/s/ David J. Healey
David Healey

13