Message: Exactly 1 year ago. "End Game for e.Digital"
expert testimony and disclosed at a date set by the Court for the exchange of expert witness
reports or such other time as the Court may require.
Defendant prays for relief and judgment as follows:
(1) That Defendant has not infringed, contributed to the infringement of, or
induced others to infringe, any claim of the Asserted Patents, directly or indirectly, literally or by
equivalents;
(2) That the claims of the Asserted Patents are invalid and/or unenforceable;
(3) That Plaintiff be enjoined from making any claims that Defendant infringed
the Asserted Patents, or instituting or prosecuting any lawsuit or proceeding which places at issue
Defendant’s right to make, use, offer for sale, sell, or import the products that allegedly infringe
the Asserted Patents;
(4) A finding that this case is exceptional and an award of reasonable
attorneys’ fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285; and
(5) Awarding such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
XI. SETTLEMENT AND ADR
The Parties filed their stipulation selecting ADR Process on March 1, 2016 and stipulated
to private mediation. (ECF No. 17.) The Parties have had some preliminary settlement
discussions and believe a settlement is not likely at this stage of the proceedings.
XII. CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR ALL PURPOSES
The Parties do not consent to have a magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings
including trial and entry of judgment.
XIII. OTHER REFERENCES
The Parties do not believe that this case is suitable for reference to binding arbitration, a
special master, or the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
XIV. NARROWING OF ISSUES
The Parties do not believe that there are any issues that can be narrowed at this time.
XV. EXPEDITED TRIAL PROCEDURE
The Parties do not believe that this case can be handled under the Expedited Trial
AMENDED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CASE NO. 3:15-CV-05793-JST
AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
12
Procedure.
XVI. SCHEDULING
The Parties request that the Court enter their amended proposed schedule, which is
attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
XVII. TRIAL
The Parties agree this matter should be tried before a jury, which Plaintiff estimates will
take 5 to 7 court days. Defendant believes that it is too early to determine the length of trial.
XVIII. DISCLOSURE OF NON-PARTY INTERESTED ENTITIES OR PERSONS
Each Party has filed a certification pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-16.
Pursuant to FRCP 7.1 and Civil L.R. 3-16, Plaintiff hereby discloses that other than the
named party, there is no further financial or other interest to report. Defendant hereby discloses
that Andon Health Co., Ltd. holds an equity stake in Defendant.
XIX. PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Counsel for the Parties have reviewed the Guidelines for Professional Conduct.
XX. OTHER
The Parties are unaware of any other such matters at this time.
XXI. PATENT LOCAL RULE 2-1(B) INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE REQUIREMENTS
(1) Proposed Modification of the Obligations or Deadlines Set Forth in the Patent
Local Rules: The Parties have submitted the proposed schedule regarding the
deadlines for compliance with the Patent Local Rules, as set forth in Exhibit 1.
(2) Scope and Timing of Claim Construction Discovery: The Parties have not yet
determined whether there is any need for expert testimony at the claim
construction hearing. Any party that expects to present, whether live or by
declaration or affidavit, expert testimony in support of its claim construction
position, will serve the Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) disclosures at least thirty (30) days
before the due date for filing opening briefs on claim construction and make its
expert witness available for deposition at a mutually agreeable time after service of
AMENDED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CASE NO. 3:15-CV-05793-JST
AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
13
the expert disclosures. The Parties will meet and confer regarding any necessary
claim construction discovery as the case progresses.
(3) Claim Construction Hearing: The Parties agree that, on a term-by-term basis,
Plaintiff will proceed first in the event of a contested construction and Defendant
will proceed first if Defendant has offered a claim construction and Plaintiff has
not offered a proposed construction or otherwise proposed plain and ordinary
meaning. The Parties will meet and confer regarding any of the logistics
associated with the Claim Construction Hearing as the case progresses. Plaintiff
anticipates the Claim Construction Hearing will take no more than a half-day.
Defendant submits that it is too early to determine the amount of time necessary
for the hearing.
(4) Technology Tutorial: Because this Court is familiar with the patent family of the
Asserted Patents, the Parties do not believe a tutorial is necessary.
Dated: July 25, 2016 HANDAL & ASSOCIATES
By: /s/ Gabriel G. Hedrick
Anton N. Handal
Gabriel G. Hedrick
Lauren G. Kane
Attorneys for Plaintiff
e.Digital Corporation
Dated: July 25, 2016 INHOUSE CO.
By: /s/Alexander Chen
Alexander Chen
Attorneys for Defendant
iSmart Alarm, Inc.
reports or such other time as the Court may require.
Defendant prays for relief and judgment as follows:
(1) That Defendant has not infringed, contributed to the infringement of, or
induced others to infringe, any claim of the Asserted Patents, directly or indirectly, literally or by
equivalents;
(2) That the claims of the Asserted Patents are invalid and/or unenforceable;
(3) That Plaintiff be enjoined from making any claims that Defendant infringed
the Asserted Patents, or instituting or prosecuting any lawsuit or proceeding which places at issue
Defendant’s right to make, use, offer for sale, sell, or import the products that allegedly infringe
the Asserted Patents;
(4) A finding that this case is exceptional and an award of reasonable
attorneys’ fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285; and
(5) Awarding such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
XI. SETTLEMENT AND ADR
The Parties filed their stipulation selecting ADR Process on March 1, 2016 and stipulated
to private mediation. (ECF No. 17.) The Parties have had some preliminary settlement
discussions and believe a settlement is not likely at this stage of the proceedings.
XII. CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR ALL PURPOSES
The Parties do not consent to have a magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings
including trial and entry of judgment.
XIII. OTHER REFERENCES
The Parties do not believe that this case is suitable for reference to binding arbitration, a
special master, or the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
XIV. NARROWING OF ISSUES
The Parties do not believe that there are any issues that can be narrowed at this time.
XV. EXPEDITED TRIAL PROCEDURE
The Parties do not believe that this case can be handled under the Expedited Trial
AMENDED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CASE NO. 3:15-CV-05793-JST
AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
12
Procedure.
XVI. SCHEDULING
The Parties request that the Court enter their amended proposed schedule, which is
attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
XVII. TRIAL
The Parties agree this matter should be tried before a jury, which Plaintiff estimates will
take 5 to 7 court days. Defendant believes that it is too early to determine the length of trial.
XVIII. DISCLOSURE OF NON-PARTY INTERESTED ENTITIES OR PERSONS
Each Party has filed a certification pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-16.
Pursuant to FRCP 7.1 and Civil L.R. 3-16, Plaintiff hereby discloses that other than the
named party, there is no further financial or other interest to report. Defendant hereby discloses
that Andon Health Co., Ltd. holds an equity stake in Defendant.
XIX. PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Counsel for the Parties have reviewed the Guidelines for Professional Conduct.
XX. OTHER
The Parties are unaware of any other such matters at this time.
XXI. PATENT LOCAL RULE 2-1(B) INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE REQUIREMENTS
(1) Proposed Modification of the Obligations or Deadlines Set Forth in the Patent
Local Rules: The Parties have submitted the proposed schedule regarding the
deadlines for compliance with the Patent Local Rules, as set forth in Exhibit 1.
(2) Scope and Timing of Claim Construction Discovery: The Parties have not yet
determined whether there is any need for expert testimony at the claim
construction hearing. Any party that expects to present, whether live or by
declaration or affidavit, expert testimony in support of its claim construction
position, will serve the Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) disclosures at least thirty (30) days
before the due date for filing opening briefs on claim construction and make its
expert witness available for deposition at a mutually agreeable time after service of
AMENDED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CASE NO. 3:15-CV-05793-JST
AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
13
the expert disclosures. The Parties will meet and confer regarding any necessary
claim construction discovery as the case progresses.
(3) Claim Construction Hearing: The Parties agree that, on a term-by-term basis,
Plaintiff will proceed first in the event of a contested construction and Defendant
will proceed first if Defendant has offered a claim construction and Plaintiff has
not offered a proposed construction or otherwise proposed plain and ordinary
meaning. The Parties will meet and confer regarding any of the logistics
associated with the Claim Construction Hearing as the case progresses. Plaintiff
anticipates the Claim Construction Hearing will take no more than a half-day.
Defendant submits that it is too early to determine the amount of time necessary
for the hearing.
(4) Technology Tutorial: Because this Court is familiar with the patent family of the
Asserted Patents, the Parties do not believe a tutorial is necessary.
Dated: July 25, 2016 HANDAL & ASSOCIATES
By: /s/ Gabriel G. Hedrick
Anton N. Handal
Gabriel G. Hedrick
Lauren G. Kane
Attorneys for Plaintiff
e.Digital Corporation
Dated: July 25, 2016 INHOUSE CO.
By: /s/Alexander Chen
Alexander Chen
Attorneys for Defendant
iSmart Alarm, Inc.
16 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply