Case 3:16-cv-06180-WHA Document 82 Filed 03/13/17 Page 1 of 2
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`COMCAST CABLE
`COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
`Plaintiff,
`
` v.
`OPENTV, INC., and NAGRAVISION SA,
`Defendants.
` /
`
`No. C 16-06180 WHA
`
`CASE MANAGEMENT
`ORDER RE PILOT SUMMARY
`JUDGMENT MOTIONS
`
`In this patent action for declaratory judgment of non-infringement, in which over one
`hundred claims from 13 patents are asserted against plaintiff Comcast Cable Communications,
`LLC’s accused products and services, the following procedure shall be used to more quickly
`and efficiently reach the merits. For this procedure, defendants and patent owners OpenTV,
`Inc., and Nagravision SA shall select one — and only one — claim, presumably their strongest
`case for infringement. Plaintiff and accused infringer Comcast shall also select one — and only
`one — claim, presumably its strongest case for non-infringement or invalidity. Each side shall
`then move for summary judgment on its chosen claim, to be heard on the normal 35-day track.
`Once Comcast files its motion, OpenTV and Nagravision may not “withdraw” their chosen
`claim, so they should take care to assert only claims they expect to win on.
`The Court has reviewed the parties’ jointly proposed schedule for these early summary
`judgment motions (Dkt. No. 78). The proposed schedule and deadlines are hereby incorporated
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`For the Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`

`

`Case 3:16-cv-06180-WHA Document 82 Filed 03/13/17 Page 2 of 2
`
`into and deemed a part of this order. To be clear, however, this order does not obviate or
`otherwise alter the parties’ obligations under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, our Civil
`Local Rules, or our Patent Local Rules as to any claims other than the ones chosen for early
`summary judgment. For example, any disclosures due thereunder must be timely made in full
`as to all hundred-plus claims in suit. And, because “[t]he parties disagree on the scope of early
`summary judgment motions” (id. at 3), this order further clarifies that each side’s early
`summary judgment motion should be as to all issues — including infringement, invalidity, or
`both — for its chosen claim. The outcome of this exchange may (or may not) warrant an
`injunction (if the asserted claims are as strong as OpenTV and Nagravision say) or terminating
`or other sanctions (if the asserted claims are as weak as Comcast says). Those potential
`remedies will be litigated soon after the motions for summary judgment are decided (depending,
`of course, on the outcome). In addition to adjudicating the chosen claims on their merits and
`indicating the relative strengths (or weaknesses) of both sides’ positions, this procedure will
`further serve to educate the undersigned judge about the overall technology at issue.
`Both sides shall please refrain from attempting to delay this procedure on the basis that
`more discovery is needed. OpenTV and Nagravision have had ample opportunity before this
`point to reverse engineer the Comcast technology in question, and are in an even better position
`to do so now that discovery is already underway in the ordinary course of this litigation. This
`case management order does not interfere with the existing discovery schedule, but no requests
`for extensions purportedly necessary in light of that schedule will be entertained.
`Pursuant to the parties’ proposed schedule, the early motions for summary judgment
`must be filed by JUNE 26, to be heard on AUGUST 3. If issues of fact prevent summary
`judgment, then we will have a trial on the disputed points soon thereafter, approximately three
`weeks after the hearing. Both sides shall please plan their calendars accordingly.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`Dated: March 13, 2017.
`
`
`WILLIAM ALSUP
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`2
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`For the Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`