Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 1 of 17
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 1 of 17
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 9
`EXHIBIT 9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 2 of 17
`
`Also available:
`Northern District’s Model Patent Jury
`Instructions
`
`Patent Local Rules
`
`Last revised: November 4, 2020
`
`Download the Patent Local Rules in PDF format
`(133KB)
`
`Download the Patent Local Rules in Word format
`(56KB)
`
` 1. SCOPE OF RULES
`
` 2. GENERAL PROVISIONS
`
` 3. PATENT DISCLOSURES
`
` 4. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION PROCEEDINGS
`
`1. SCOPE OF RULES
`
`1-1. Title
`
`These are the Local Rules of Practice for Patent Cases before the United States District Court for the Northern
`District of California. They should be cited as “Patent L.R. __.”
`
`1-2. Scope and Construction
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`1/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 3 of 17
`These rules apply to all civil actions led in or transferred to this Court which allege infringement of a utility
`patent in a complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim or third party claim, or which seek a declaratory judgment that
`a utility patent is not infringed, is invalid or is unenforceable. The Civil Local Rules of this Court shall also apply
`to such actions, except to the extent that they are inconsistent with these Patent Local Rules. If the lings or
`actions in a case do not trigger the application of these Patent Local Rules under the terms set forth herein, the
`parties shall, as soon as such circumstances become known, meet and confer for the purpose of agreeing on the
`application of these Patent Local Rules to the case and promptly report the results of the meet and confer to the
`Court.
`
`1-3. Modication of these Rules
`
`The Court may modify the obligations or deadlines set forth in these Patent Local Rules based on the
`circumstances of any particular case, including, without limitation, the simplicity or complexity of the case as
`shown by the patents, claims, products, or parties involved. Such modications shall, in most cases, be made at
`the initial case management conference, but may be made at other times upon a showing of good cause. In
`advance of submission of any request for a modication, the parties shall meet and confer for purposes of
`reaching an agreement, if possible, upon any modication.
`
`1-4. Eective Date
`
`These Patent Local Rules take eect on December 1, 2009. They govern patent cases led on or after that date. For
`actions pending prior to December 1, 2009, the provisions of the Patent Local Rules that were in eect on
`November 30, 2009, shall apply,except that the time periods for actions pending before December 1, 2009 shall be
`those set forth in and computed as in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Patent Local Rules.
`
`Back to top
`
`2. GENERAL PROVISIONS
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`2/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 4 of 17
`
`2-1. Governing Procedure
`
`(a) Notice of Pendency of Other Action
`Involving Same Patent.
`
`(1) When actions concerning the same patent are led within two years of each other by the same
`plainti, they will be deemed related.
`
`(2) Whenever a party knows or learns that actions concerning the same patent have been led within
`two years of each other by the same plainti, the party must promptly le in each such case A
`Notice of Pendency of Other Action Involving Same Patent.
`
`(3) Pursuant to the Assignment Plan, the Clerk will reassign the related higher-numbered cases to
`the Judge assigned to the lowest-numbered case and will le the appropriate notication on the
`docket of each reassigned case.
`
`(4) If the Judge determines that the reassignment is not in compliance with subsection (1), the Judge
`may refer the matter to the Executive Committee for resolution.
`
`(5) Even if a case is not deemed related to a pending case pursuant to this rule, a party may still seek a
`related case determination pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-12.
`
`(6) If the lowest-numbered case is assigned to a magistrate judge to whom the parties have
`consented to preside over the action, the magistrate judge will retain that case even if consent is
`not entered in higher-numbered cases deemed related pursuant to subsection (1).
`
`(b)  Initial Case Management Conference. When the parties confer pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), in addition to
`the matters covered by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, the parties shall discuss and address in the Case Management Statement
`led pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and Civil L.R. 16-9, the following topics:
`
`(1)  Proposed modication of the obligations or deadlines set forth in these Patent Local Rules to ensure
`that they are suitable for the circumstances of the particular case (see Patent L.R. 1-3);
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`3/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 5 of 17
`(2)  The scope and timing of any claim construction discovery including disclosure of and discovery from
`any expert witness permitted by the court;
`
`(3)  The format of the Claim Construction Hearing, including whether the Court will hear live testimony,
`the order of presentation, and the estimated length of the hearing; and
`
`(4)  How the parties intend to educate the court on the technology at issue.
`
`(5)  The parties shall provide the court with a non-binding, good-faith estimate of the damages range
`expected for the case along with an explanation for the estimates. If either party is unable to provide
`such information, that party shall explain why it cannot and what specic information is needed before
`it can do so. Such party shall also state the time by which it should be in a position to provide that
`estimate and explanation.
`
`2-2. Condentiality
`
`Discovery cannot be withheld on the basis of condentiality absent Court order. The Protective Order authorized
`by the Northern District of California shall govern discovery unless the Court enters a dierent protective order.
`The approved Protective Order can be found on the Court’s website.
`
`2-3. Certication of Disclosures
`
`All statements, disclosures, or charts led or served in accordance with these Patent Local Rules shall be dated
`and signed by counsel of record. Counsel’s signature shall constitute a certication that to the best of his or her
`knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry that is reasonable under the circumstances, the
`information contained in the statement, disclosure, or chart is complete and correct at the time it is made.
`
`2-4. Admissibility of Disclosures
`
`Statements, disclosures, or charts governed by these Patent Local Rules are admissible to the extent permitted by
`the Federal Rules of Evidence or Procedure. However, the statements and disclosures provided for in Patent L.R.
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`4/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 6 of 17
`4-1 and 4-2 are not admissible for any purpose other than in connection with motions seeking an extension or
`modication of the time periods within which actions contemplated by these Patent Local Rules shall be taken.
`
`2-5. Relationship to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
`
`Except as provided in this paragraph or as otherwise ordered, it shall not be a ground for objecting to an opposing
`party’s discovery request (e.g., interrogatory, document request, request for admission, deposition question) or
`declining to provide information otherwise required to be disclosed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) that the
`discovery request or disclosure requirement is premature in light of, or otherwise conicts with, these Patent
`Local Rules, absent other legitimate objection. A party may object, however, to responding to the following
`categories of discovery requests (or decline to provide information in its initial disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P.
`26(a)(1)) on the ground that they are premature in light of the timetable provided in the Patent Local Rules:
`
`(a)  Requests seeking to elicit a party’s claim construction position;
`
`(b)  Requests seeking to elicit from the patent claimant a comparison of the asserted claims and the accused
`apparatus, product, device, process, method, act, or other instrumentality;
`
`(c)  Requests seeking to elicit from an accused infringer a comparison of the asserted claims and the prior art;
`and
`
`(d)  Requests seeking to elicit from an accused infringer the identication of any advice of counsel, and related
`documents.
`
`Where a party properly objects to a discovery request (or declines to provide information in its initial disclosures
`under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)) as set forth above, that party shall provide the requested information on the date on
`which it is required to be provided to an opposing party under these Patent Local Rules or as set by the Court,
`unless there exists another legitimate ground for objection.
`
`Back to top
`
`3. PATENT DISCLOSURES
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`5/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 7 of 17
`
`3-1. Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions
`
`Not later than 14 days after the Initial Case Management Conference, a party claiming patent infringement shall
`serve on all parties a “Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions.” Separately for each
`opposing party, the “Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions” shall contain the following
`information:
`
`(a)  Each claim of each patent in suit that is allegedly infringed by each opposing party, including for each claim
`the applicable statutory subsections of 35 U.S.C. §271 asserted;
`
`(b)  Separately for each asserted claim, each accused apparatus, product, device, process, method, act, or other
`instrumentality (“Accused Instrumentality”) of each opposing party of which the party is aware. This
`identication shall be as specic as possible. Each product, device, and apparatus shall be identied by name
`or model number, if known. Each method or process shall be identied by name, if known, or by any
`product, device, or apparatus which, when used, allegedly results in the practice of the claimed method or
`process;
`
`(c)  A chart identifying specically where and how each limitation of each asserted claim is found within each
`Accused Instrumentality, including for each limitation that such party contends is governed by 35 U.S.C. §
`112(6), the identity of the structure(s), act(s), or material(s) in the Accused Instrumentality that performs
`the claimed function.
`
`(d)  For each claim which is alleged to have been indirectly infringed, an identication of any direct
`infringement and a description of the acts of the alleged indirect infringer that contribute to or are inducing
`that direct infringement. Insofar as alleged direct infringement is based on joint acts of multiple parties, the
`role of each such party in the direct infringement must be described.
`
`(e)  Whether each limitation of each asserted claim is alleged to be literally present or present under the
`doctrine of equivalents in the Accused Instrumentality;
`
`(f)  For any patent that claims priority to an earlier application, the priority date to which each asserted claim
`allegedly is entitled; and
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`6/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 8 of 17
`(g)  If a party claiming patent infringement wishes to preserve the right to rely, for any purpose, on the
`assertion that its own or its licensee’s apparatus, product, device, process, method, act, or other
`instrumentality practices the claimed invention, the party shall identify, separately for each asserted claim,
`each such apparatus, product, device, process, method, act, or other instrumentality that incorporates or
`reects that particular claim.
`
`(h)  Identify the timing of the point of rst infringement, the start of claimed damages, and the end of claimed
`damages; and
`
`(i)  If a party claiming patent infringement alleges willful infringement, the basis for such allegation.
`
`3-2. Document Production Accompanying Disclosure
`
`With the “Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions,” the party claiming patent infringement
`shall produce to each opposing party or make available for inspection and copying:
`
`(a)  Documents (e.g., contracts, purchase orders, invoices, advertisements, marketing materials, oer letters,
`beta site testing agreements, and third party or joint development agreements) sucient to evidence each
`discussion with, disclosure to, or other manner of providing to a third party, or sale of or oer to sell, or any
`public use of, the claimed invention prior to the date of application for the patent in suit. A party’s
`production of a document as required herein shall not constitute an admission that such document
`evidences or is prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102;
`
`(b)  All documents evidencing the conception, reduction to practice, design, and development of each claimed
`invention, which were created on or before the date of application for the patent in suit or the priority date
`identied pursuant to Patent L.R. 3-1(f), whichever is earlier;
`
`(c)  A copy of the le history for each patent in suit;
`
`(d)  All documents evidencing ownership of the patent rights by the party asserting patent infringement;
`
`(e)  If a party identies instrumentalities pursuant to Patent L.R. 3-1(g), documents sucient to show the
`operation of any aspects or elements of such instrumentalities the patent claimant relies upon as embodying
`any asserted claims;
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`7/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 9 of 17
`(f)  All agreements, including licenses, transferring an interest in any patent-in-suit;
`
`(g)  All agreements that the party asserting infringement contends are comparable to a license that would
`result from a hypothetical reasonable royalty negotiation;
`
`(h)  All agreements that otherwise may be used to support the party asserting infringement’s damages case;
`
`(i)  If a party identies instrumentalities pursuant to Patent L.R. 3-1(g), documents sucient to show marking
`of such embodying accused instrumentalities and if it wants to preserve the right to recover lost prots
`based on such products, sales, revenues, costs and prots of such embodying accused instrumentalities; and
`
`(j)  All documents comprising or reecting a F/RAND commitment or agreement with respect to the asserted
`patent(s).
`
`The producing party shall separately identify by production number which documents correspond to each
`category.
`
`3-3. Invalidity Contentions
`
`Not later than 45 days after service upon it of the “Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions,”
`each party opposing a claim of patent infringement, shall serve on all parties its “Invalidity Contentions” which
`shall contain the following information:
`
`(a)  The identity of each item of prior art that allegedly anticipates each asserted claim or renders it obvious.
`Each prior art patent shall be identied by its number, country of origin, and date of issue. Each prior art
`publication shall be identied by its title, date of publication, and where feasible, author and publisher. Each
`alleged sale or public use shall be identied by specifying the item oered for sale or publicly used or known,
`the date the oer or use took place or the information became known, and the identity of the person or
`entity which made the use or which made and received the oer, or the person or entity which made the
`information known or to whom it was made known. For pre-AIA claims, prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f)
`shall be identied by providing the name of the person(s) from whom and the circumstances under which
`the invention or any part of it was derived. For pre-AIA claims, prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(g) shall be
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`8/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 10 of 17
`identied by providing the identities of the person(s) or entities involved in and the circumstances
`surrounding the making of the invention before the patent applicant(s);
`
`(b)  Whether each item of prior art anticipates each asserted claim or renders it obvious. If obviousness is
`alleged, an explanation of why the prior art renders the asserted claim obvious, including an identication
`of any combinations of prior art showing obviousness;
`
`(c)  A chart identifying specically where and how in each alleged item of prior art each limitation of each
`asserted claim is found, including for each limitation that such party contends is governed by 35 U.S.C. §
`112(6), the identity of the structure(s), act(s), or material(s) in each item of prior art that performs the
`claimed function; and
`
`(d)  Any grounds of invalidity based on 35 U.S.C. § 101, indeniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112(2) or enablement or
`written description under 35 U.S.C. § 112(1) of any of the asserted claims.
`
`3-4. Document Production Accompanying Invalidity Contentions
`
`With the “Invalidity Contentions,” the party opposing a claim of patent infringement shall produce or make
`available for inspection and copying:
`
`(a)  Source code, specications, schematics, ow charts, artwork, formulas, or other documentation sucient
`to show the operation of any aspects or elements of an Accused Instrumentality identied by the patent
`claimant in its Patent L.R. 3-1(c) chart;
`
`(b)  A copy or sample of the prior art identied pursuant to Patent L.R. 3-3(a) which does not appear in the le
`history of the patent(s) at issue. To the extent any such item is not in English, an English translation of the
`portion(s) relied upon shall be produced;
`
`(c)  All agreements that the party opposing infringement contends are comparable to a license that would
`result from a hypothetical reasonable royalty negotiation;
`
`(d)  Documents sucient to show the sales, revenue, cost, and prots for accused instrumentalities identied
`pursuant to Patent L.R. 3-1(b) for any period of alleged infringement; and
`
`(e)  All agreements that may be used to support the party denying infringement’s damages case.
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`9/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 11 of 17
`
`The producing party shall separately identify by production number which documents correspond to each
`category.
`
`3-5. Disclosure Requirement in Patent Cases for Declaratory Judgment of Invalidity
`
`(a)  Invalidity Contentions If No Claim of Infringement. In all cases in which a party les a complaint or other
`pleading seeking a declaratory judgment that a patent is invalid Patent L.R. 3-1 and 3-2 shall not apply
`unless and until a claim for patent infringement is made by a party. If the defendant does not assert a claim
`for patent infringement in its answer to the complaint, no later than 14 days after the defendant serves its
`answer, or 14 days after the Initial Case Management Conference, whichever is later, the party seeking a
`declaratory judgment of invalidity shall serve upon each opposing party its Invalidity Contentions that
`conform to Patent L.R. 3-3 and produce or make available for inspection and copying the documents
`described in Patent L.R. 3-4.
`
`(b)  Inapplicability of Rule. This Patent L.R. 3-5 shall not apply to cases in which a request for a declaratory
`judgment that a patent is invalid is led in response to a complaint for infringement of the same patent.
`
`3-6. Amendment to Contentions
`
`Amendment of the Infringement Contentions or the Invalidity Contentions may be made only by order of the
`Court upon a timely showing of good cause. Non-exhaustive examples of circumstances that may, absent undue
`prejudice to the non-moving party, support a nding of good cause include:
`
`(a)  A claim construction by the Court dierent from that proposed by the party seeking amendment;
`
`(b)  Recent discovery of material, prior art despite earlier diligent search; and
`
`(c)  Recent discovery of nonpublic information about the Accused Instrumentality which was not discovered,
`despite diligent eorts, before the service of the Infringement Contentions.
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`10/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 12 of 17
`The duty to supplement discovery responses does not excuse the need to obtain leave of court to amend
`contentions.
`
`3-7. Advice of Counsel
`
`Not later than 30 days after service by the Court of its Claim Construction Ruling, each party relying upon advice
`of counsel as part of a patent-related claim or defense for any reason shall:
`
`(a)  Produce or make available for inspection and copying any written advice and documents related thereto for
`which the attorney-client and work product protection have been waived;
`
`(b)  Provide a written summary of any oral advice and produce or make available for inspection and copying
`that summary and documents related thereto for which the attorney-client and work product protection
`have been waived; and
`
`(c)  Serve a privilege log identifying any other documents, except those authored by counsel acting solely as
`trial counsel, relating to the subject matter of the advice which the party is withholding on the grounds of
`attorney-client privilege or work product protection.
`
`A party who does not comply with the requirements of this Patent L.R. 3-7 shall not be permitted to rely on advice
`of counsel for any purpose absent a stipulation of all parties or by order of the Court.
`
`3-8. Damages Contentions
`
`Not later than 50 days after service of the Invalidity Contentions, each party asserting infringement shall:
`
`(a)  Identify each of the category(-ies) of damages it is seeking for the asserted infringement, as well as its
`theories of recovery, factual support for those theories, and computations of damages within each category,
`including:
`
`1. lost prots;
`
`2. price erosion;
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`11/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 13 of 17
`3. convoyed or collateral sales;
`
`4. reasonable royalty; and
`
`5. any other form of damages.
`
`(b)  To the extent a party contends it is unable to provide a fulsome response to the disclosures required by this
`rule, it shall identify the information it requires.
`
`3-9. Responsive Damages Contentions
`
`Not later than 30 days after service of the Damages Contentions served pursuant to Patent L.R. 3-8, each party
`denying infringement shall identify specically how and why it disagrees with those contentions. This should
`include the party’s armative position on each issue. To the extent a party contends it is unable to provide a
`fulsome response to the disclosures required by this rule, it shall identify the information it requires.
`
`Back to top
`
`4. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION PROCEEDINGS
`
`4-1. Exchange of Proposed Terms for Construction
`
`(a)  Not later than 14 days after service of the “Invalidity Contentions” pursuant to Patent L.R. 3-3, not later
`than 42 days after service upon it of the “Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions” in
`those actions where validity is not at issue (and Patent L.R. 3-3 does not apply), or, in all cases in which a
`party les a complaint or other pleading seeking a declaratory judgment not based on validity, not later than
`14 days after the defendant serves an answer that does not assert a claim for patent infringement (and
`Patent L.R. 3-1 does not apply), each party shall serve on each other party a list of claim terms which that
`party contends should be construed by the Court, and identify any claim term which that party contends
`should be governed by 35 U.S.C. § 112(6).
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`12/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 14 of 17
`(b)  The parties shall thereafter meet and confer for the purposes of limiting the terms in dispute by narrowing
`or resolving dierences and facilitating the ultimate preparation of a Joint Claim Construction and
`Prehearing Statement. The parties shall also jointly identify the 10 terms likely to be most signicant to
`resolving the parties’ dispute, including those terms for which construction may be case or claim
`dispositive.
`
`4-2. Exchange of Preliminary Claim Constructions and Extrinsic Evidence
`
`(a)  Not later than 21 days after the exchange of the lists pursuant to Patent L.R. 4-1, the parties shall
`simultaneously exchange proposed constructions of each term identied by either party for claim
`construction. Each such “Preliminary Claim Construction” shall also, for each term which any party
`contends is governed by 35 U.S.C. § 112(6), identify the structure(s), act(s), or material(s) corresponding to
`that term’s function.
`
`(b)  At the same time the parties exchange their respective “Preliminary Claim Constructions,” each party shall
`also identify all references from the specication or prosecution history that support its proposed
`construction and designate any supporting extrinsic evidence including, without limitation, dictionary
`denitions, citations to learned treatises and prior art, and testimony of percipient and expert witnesses.
`Extrinsic evidence shall be identied by production number or by producing a copy if not previously
`produced. With respect to any supporting witness, percipient or expert, the identifying party shall also
`provide a description of the substance of that witness’ proposed testimony that includes a listing of any
`opinions to be rendered in connection with claim construction.
`
`(c)  The parties shall thereafter meet and confer for the purposes of narrowing the issues and nalizing
`preparation of a Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement.
`
`4-3. Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement and Expert Reports
`
`Not later than 60 days after service of the “Invalidity Contentions,” the parties shall complete and le a Joint
`Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement, which shall contain the following information:
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`13/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 15 of 17
`(a)  The construction of those terms on which the parties agree;
`
`(b)  Each party’s proposed construction of each disputed term, together with an identication of all references
`from the specication or prosecution history that support that construction, and an identication of any
`extrinsic evidence known to the party on which it intends to rely either to support its proposed construction
`or to oppose any other party’s proposed construction, including, but not limited to, as permitted by law,
`dictionary denitions, citations to learned treatises and prior art, and testimony of percipient and expert
`witnesses;
`
`(c)  An identication of the terms whose construction will be most signicant to the resolution of the case up to
`a maximum of 10. The parties shall also identify any term among the 10 whose construction will be case or
`claim dispositive. If the parties cannot agree on the 10 most signicant terms, the parties shall identify the
`ones which they do agree are most signicant and then they may evenly divide the remainder with each
`party identifying what it believes are the remaining most signicant terms. However, the total terms
`identied by all parties as most signicant cannot exceed 10. For example, in a case involving two parties, if
`the parties agree upon the identication of ve terms as most signicant, each may only identify two
`additional terms as most signicant; if the parties agree upon eight such terms, each party may only identify
`only one additional term as most signicant.
`
`(d)  The anticipated length of time necessary for the Claim Construction Hearing;
`
`(e)  Whether any party proposes to call one or more witnesses at the Claim Construction Hearing, and the
`identity of each such witness.
`
`(f)   An identication of any factual ndings requested from the Court related to claim construction.
`
`Unless the parties agree otherwise, not later than 60 days after service of the “Invalidity Contentions,” any party
`that intends to rely on any witness who will give expert testimony to support that party’s proposed constructions
`shall serve the other party or parties with a claim construction expert report for that witness. Such reports shall
`comply with the disclosure requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(A)(2)(B).
`
`4-4. Completion of Claim Construction Discovery
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`14/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 16 of 17
`Not later than 30 days after service and ling of the Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement, the
`parties shall complete all discovery relating to claim construction, including any depositions with respect to
`claim construction of any witnesses, including experts, identied in the Preliminary Claim Construction
`statement (Patent L.R. 4-2) or Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement (Patent L.R. 4-3).
`
`4-5. Claim Construction Briefs
`
`(a)  Not later than 45 days after serving and ling the Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement, the
`party claiming patent infringement, or the party asserting invalidity if there is no infringement issue
`present in the case, shall serve and le an opening brief and any evidence supporting its claim construction.
`
`(b)  Not later than 14 days after service upon it of an opening brief, each opposing party shall serve and le its
`responsive brief and supporting evidence.
`
`(c)  Not later than 7 days after service upon it of a responsive brief, the party claiming patent infringement, or
`the party asserting invalidity if there is no infringement issue present in the case, shall serve and le any
`reply brief and any evidence directly rebutting the supporting evidence contained in an opposing party’s
`response.
`
`4-6. Claim Construction Hearing
`
`Subject to the convenience of the Court’s calendar, two weeks following submission of the reply brief specied in
`Patent L.R. 4-5(c), the Court shall conduct a Claim Construction Hearing, to the extent the parties or the Court
`believe a hearing is necessary for construction of the claims at issue.
`
`4-7. Good Faith Participation
`
`A failure to make a good faith eort to narrow the instances of disputed terms or otherwise participate in the
`meet and confer process of any of the provisions of section 4 may expose counsel to sanctions, including under 28
`U.S.C. § 1927.
`
`Back to top
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`15/16
`
`

`

`3/21/22, 6:00 PM
`
`Patent Local Rules | United States District Court, Northern District of California
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 75-10 Filed 03/28/22 Page 17 of 17
`
`https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/patent-local-rules/
`
`16/16
`
`