CSR Technology, Inc. v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.
Filing
30
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER. Claim Construction Hearing set for 7/17/2013 10:00 AM. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 8/28/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/28/2012)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
MARK D. FOWLER, Bar No. 124235
mark.fowler@dlapiper.com
TIMOTHY LOHSE, Bar No. 177230
timothy.lohse@dlapiper.com
MICHAEL G. SCHWARTZ, Bar No. 197010
michael.schwartz@dlapiper.com
AARON WAINSCOAT, Bar No. 218339
aaron.wainscoat@dlapiper.com
ERIK R. FUEHRER, Bar No. 252578
erik.fuehrer@dlapiper.com
SUMMER KRAUSE, Bar No. 264858
summer.krause@dlapiper.com
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
2000 University Avenue
East Palo Alto, CA 94303-2214
Tel: 650.833.2000
Fax: 650.833.2001
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CSR TECHNOLOGY INC.
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
15
16
CSR TECHNOLOGY INC., a Delaware
Corporation,
Plaintiff,
17
18
19
20
CASE NO. 12-CV-02619-RS
[PROPOSED] CASE MANAGEMENT
ORDER
v.
FREESCALE SEMICONDUCTOR, INC.,
a Delaware Corporation,
Defendant.
21
22
23
On August 23, 2012, the Court held the Initial Case Management Conference at which
24
Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant CSR Technology Inc. (“CSR”) and Defendant and
25
Counterclaimant Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. (“Freescale”) appeared through their respective
26
counsel of record. Pursuant to the Court’s Order during the Case Management Conference, IT IS
27
HEREBY ORDERED that the following schedule shall be adopted by the Court:
28
DLA P IPER LLP (US)
EAST PALO ALTO
-1WEST\238126610.1
[PROPOSED] CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
CASE NO. 12-CV-02619-RS
1
Event
Proposed Schedule
3
Last day to amend pleadings to add parties without
leave of Court
8/30/2012
4
Last day to serve Initial Disclosures pursuant to
F.R.C.P. 26(a)
9/6/2012
5
6
Deadline for Infringement Contentions (Patent L.R.
3-1 & 3-2)
10/15/2012
7
Deadline for Invalidity Contentions (Patent L.R. 3-3
& 3-4)
1/15/13
8
Parties to Exchange Terms for Construction (Patent
L.R. 4-1)
2/15/13
10
Parties to Exchange Proposed Constructions (Patent
L.R. 4-2)
3/7/13
11
Joint Claim Construction and Pre-Hearing Statement
(Patent L.R. 4-3)
4/4/13
2
9
12
13
Completion of Claim Construction Discovery (Patent
5/1/13
L.R. 4-4)
14
CSR’s Opening Claim Construction Brief (Patent
L.R. 4-5)
5/10/13
15
Freescale’s Responsive Claim Construction Brief
(Patent L.R. 4-5)
6/11/13
16
CSR’s Reply Claim Construction Brief (Patent L.R.
4-5)
6/25/13
Technology at issue tutorial
7/10/13
Claim Construction Hearing (Patent L.R. 4-6)
7/17/13 at 10:00 a.m.
Further Case Management Conference
To Be Set by Court Following
Issuance of Claim Construction
Order
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DLA P IPER LLP (US)
EAST PALO ALTO
Pursuant to the parties’ Joint Case Management Conference Statement and the parties’
Joint August 27, 2012, Letter, IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED as follows:
1.
Depositions
Party deposition testimony shall mean Rule 30(b)(6) deposition testimony of a party and
Rule 30(b)(1) deposition testimony of current employees of that party. Each party shall be
entitled to take seventy-five (75) hours of party deposition testimony.
-2WEST\238126610.1
[PROPOSED] CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
CASE NO. 12-CV-02619-RS
1
2
3
Subject to the foregoing limitation on party depositions, each party shall be entitled to take
a total of one-hundred fifty (150) hours of fact deposition testimony.
If either party in good faith believes it needs to exceed the foregoing limits as the case
4
progresses, the parties shall to meet and confer in good faith to determine if additional deposition
5
time should be permitted.
6
The foregoing limitations are not intended to apply to expert depositions. With respect to
7
expert depositions, the parties shall meet and confer in good faith regarding the need for
8
depositions of experts relating to claim construction. The parties also shall meet and confer in
9
good faith to discuss reasonable limitations on expert depositions after service of the parties’
10
expert reports.
11
2.
12
Neither party need produce the following ESI:
Electronically Stored Information (“ESI”)
13
Backup tapes and systems created for the sole purpose of disaster recovery.
14
Voicemail
15
Instant Messaging
16
Residual, deleted, fragmented, damaged, or temporary data
17
Encrypted data/password-protected files, where the key or password cannot
18
19
be ascertained after reasonable efforts.
Pursuant to the parties’ agreement, it is unnecessary to search individual employees’ hand-
20
held electronic devices (e.g. their cell phones). The parties shall meet and confer in good faith to
21
reach agreement concerning any additional ESI discovery issues and, if necessary, to submit an
22
additional stipulation addressing such agreements.
23
3.
24
The parties need not include communications with litigation counsel on their privilege
25
logs to preserve their privileges or protections. For all other privileged responsive documents
26
created on or before the filing of the initial Complaint, the parties are required to log all
27
privileged responsive documents. The parties are not required to log documents created after the
28
filing of the initial Complaint. The parties shall meet and confer in good faith to determine if
-3-
DLA P IPER LLP (US)
EAST PALO ALTO
WEST\238126610.1
Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Doctrine
[PROPOSED] CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
CASE NO. 12-CV-02619-RS
1
additional limitations on the logging of privileged materials are appropriate in this case.
2
4.
3
The procedures for expert discovery as provided by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
4
26(b)(4) shall govern expert discovery. For the avoidance of doubt, the parties have requested the
5
Court to include the following statement concerning expert discovery: The parties shall not seek
6
drafts of expert reports, declarations, affidavits, or notes taken by experts retained to testify in this
7
case, whether those reports, declarations, affidavits, or notes relating to this case, to any prior
8
investigation, litigation or proceeding, or to any currently pending investigation, litigation or
9
proceeding involving any of the parties in this case.
Expert Communications and Drafts
10
The parties shall not seek documents relating to communications between such experts
11
and counsel, including e-mail communications and invoices, whether generated in connection
12
with this case, a prior litigation, or any currently pending investigation, litigation or proceeding
13
involving any of the parties in this case, except for documents, information and things included in
14
or attached to such communications that are directly relied upon by the expert in his or her expert
15
report, declaration, affidavit, or testimony.
16
The parties shall not inquire at deposition or trial as to the contents of drafts of expert
17
reports, declarations or affidavits, or notes pertaining thereto, whether drafted in connection with
18
this case, a prior litigation, or any currently pending investigation, litigation or proceeding, and
19
that the parties shall not inquire at deposition or at trial as to the expert’s communications, written
20
or oral, with counsel, whether generated in connection with this case, a prior litigation, or any
21
currently pending investigation, litigation or proceeding, except to the extent that the expert
22
explicitly references or cites information from counsel in his or her expert report, declaration,
23
affidavit, or testimony.
24
The parties shall, however, identify and produce copies of any documents referenced or
25
cited by the expert in his or her expert report. Furthermore, the parties are not restricted from
26
(i) inquiring into the basis of any of the opinions expressed by any experts in his or her report,
27
declaration, or affidavit, including the manner by which such opinions were reached, and
28
information considered in reaching such opinions; (ii) otherwise inquiring into the process by
-4-
DLA P IPER LLP (US)
EAST PALO ALTO
WEST\238126610.1
[PROPOSED] CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
CASE NO. 12-CV-02619-RS
1
which an expert report, affidavit, or declaration was drafted, provided that, in so doing, the parties
2
may not discover the contents of any such drafts of expert reports, declarations, affidavits, or
3
notes pertaining thereto; or (iii) obtaining reports, testimony, or other discovery or evidence
4
produced in any prior litigation or any currently pending investigation, litigation or proceeding
5
involving the parties in this case. Not withstanding the above, the parties may discover all facts
6
and data (including documents) considered by the expert in forming his/her opinions.
7
5.
8
The parties shall each produce responsive and non-privileged electronic documents
9
Form of Document Production
electronically in a manner to be agreed upon by the parties.
10
6.
11
The parties shall conduct a non-binding private mediation within ninety (90) days after the
12
ADR Proceedings or Settlement Conferences
Court issues its Claim Construction Order in this case.
13
7.
14
With respect to documents required to be filed with the Court, the timing for filing and
Electronic Service
15
service shall be governed by the Northern District of California Local Rules, the Northern District
16
of California General Orders, the standing orders of this Court and any other orders this Court
17
may issue pertaining to the filing and service of documents. With respect to all other documents
18
that are required to be served, the parties have consented in writing that service by electronic
19
means shall be allowed as set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2)(E) and, pursuant to
20
the parties’ agreement, (1) such service shall be deemed complete upon transmission, provided
21
that the serving party does not learn that the transmission did not reach the person to be served;
22
(2) such service shall have the same response time as if hand delivered; and (3) a document is
23
deemed served on a particular day if sent by 4 p.m. Pacific Time on that calendar day; otherwise
24
it is deemed served on the next calendar day.
25
26
8/28/12
DATED: ______________________
27
28
DLA P IPER LLP (US)
EAST PALO ALTO
_________________________________
The Honorable Richard Seeborg
United States District Court Judge
-5-
WEST\238126610.1
[PROPOSED] CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
CASE NO. 12-CV-02619-RS
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
