WI-LAN Inc. v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. et al

Filing 313

Unopposed MOTION DEFENDANTS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO DESIGNATE ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS FOR TRIAL by Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc., Ericsson Inc., Exedea INC., HTC America, Inc., HTC Corporation, Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., Sony Mobile Communications AB, Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Deoras, Akshay)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
) Civil Action No. 6:10-CV-521-LED
)
ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC.;
) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM
ERICSSON; ERICSSON INC.; SONY MOBILE )
)
COMMUNICATIONS AB; SONY MOBILE
)
COMMUNICATIONS (USA) INC.; HTC
)
CORPORATION; HTC AMERICA, INC.;
)
EXEDEA INC.
)
)
Defendants.
)
WI-LAN INC.,

DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE
TO DESIGNATE ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS FOR TRIAL
Defendants hereby file their Unopposed Motion for Leave to Designate Additional
Exhibits for Trial. Plaintiff Wi-LAN Inc. (“Wi-LAN”) does not oppose this motion.
Defendants respectfully move for leave to increase the number of exhibits the parties may
designate for trial. This case involves four separate Defendants, each accused of infringing
multiple claims of the four patents-in-suit, and over 80 accused products. Moreover, two of the
Defendants have raised breach-of-contract counterclaims.

The parties have been working

together diligently to narrow the number of exhibits needed to be designated for trial.
Defendants now respectfully request leave for each side to designate 400 exhibits for trial. This
Motion is not intended to burden the Court but is rather intended to allow the parties to fully and
fairly present their case and reduce the number of issues which must be brought before the Court
during trial. The parties will continue to endeavor to reduce the number of trial exhibits and

objections as trial approaches. Good cause exists to increase the exhibit limits here based on the
number of Defendants, the number of asserted claims and accused products, and the overall
complexity of this case.

Dated: February 14, 2013

Respectfully submitted,
By:

/s/ Akshay S. Deoras____________

Gregory S. Arovas (pro hac vice)
Robert A. Appleby (pro hac vice)
Jeanne M. Heffernan (pro hac vice)
Akshay S. Deoras (pro hac vice)
Ryan P. Kane (pro hac vice)
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
601 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Michael E. Jones (TX Bar 10929400)
Allen F. Gardner (TX Bar 24043679)
POTTER MINTON PC
110 N. College, Suite 500 (75702)
P.O. Box 359
Tyler, Texas 75710
[phone]
[phone] (Facsimile)
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc.
/s/ Martin R. Bader (with permission)
Stephen S. Korniczky (pro hac vice)
Martin R. Bader (pro hac vice)
Daniel N. Yannuzzi (pro hac vice)
Lee Hsu (pro hac vice)
Graham M. Buccigross (pro hac vice)
SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
12275 El Camino Real, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92130

2

Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Eric Hugh Findlay (TX Bar No. 00789886)
Brian Craft (TX Bar No. 04972020)
FINDLAY CRAFT
6760 Old Jacksonville Hwy, Suite 101
Tyler, TX 75703
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants HTC Corporation, HTC
America Inc., and Exeda Inc.

/s/ Richard L. Wynne, Jr. (with permission)
Bruce S. Sostek (TX Bar 18855700)
Richard L. Wynne, Jr. (TX Bar 24003214)
Adrienne E. Dominguez (TX Bar 00793630)
J. Michael Heinlen (TX Bar 24032287)
Timothy E. Hudson (TX Bar 24046120)
Justin S. Cohen (TX Bar 24078356)
THOMPSON & KNIGHT LLP
1722 Routh Street
Suite 1500
Dallas, Texas 75201-2533
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
William J. Cornelius (TX Bar 04834700)
Jennifer Ainsworth (TX Bar 00784720)
WILSON ROBERTSON & CORNELIUS PC
909 ESE Loop 323, Suite 400
P.O. Box 7339
Tyler, TX 75711-7339
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

3

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants Ericsson Inc.,
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Sony Mobile
Communications (USA) Inc., and Sony Mobile
Communications AB

4

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
I hereby certify that on February 6, 2013, and February 13, 2013, counsel for Defendants
conferred with Ajeet Pai, counsel for Plaintiff, regarding this motion. Counsel for Plaintiff stated
that Plaintiff does not oppose the motion.

/s/ Akshay S. Deoras______ ____________
Akshay S. Deoras

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in compliance
with Local Rule CV-5(a) on this the 14th day of February, 2013. As such, this document was served
on all counsel who are deemed to have consented to electronic service.

/s/ Akshay S. Deoras______ ____________
Akshay S. Deoras

5