`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`FINJAN LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SONICWALL, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Case No. 17-cv-04467-BLF
`
`
`ORDER STRIKING MOTIONS AT ECF
`346, 347, 348, 350, AND 351
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The Court STRIKES the motions at ECF 346, 347, 348, 350, and 351. Finjan LLC’s
`
`motions at ECF 348 and 350 are set for hearing on June 24, 2021—well after trial begins.
`
`SonicWall, Inc.’s motion at ECF 347 was improperly set for hearing on February 18, 2021.
`
`The Court’s Standing Order is clear that “parties are responsible for scheduling Daubert
`
`hearings at least 60 days before trial.” Standing Order Re Civil Case § IV.A.2; see also id. § III.A
`
`(motions “are heard by reservation only”). The parties are aware of the Court’s scheduling
`
`timeline. See id. § IV.C (“the Court is setting hearings approximately 5 months out”). And as for
`
`SonicWall’s motion, it was filed a bare 28 days in advance of the desired hearing date in violation
`
`of Local Rule 7-2(a). See also id. § IV.B (motions must be fully briefed 14 days before hearing).
`
`Further, the Court advises the parties that the Court will not grant an order shortening time to hear
`
`these motions. The parties were advised of these requirements at the initial case management
`
`conference and all counsel are familiar with this Court’s requirements for Daubert motions having
`
`litigated other cases before this judge.
`
`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
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 353 Filed 01/22/21 Page 2 of 2
`
`
`
`The requirement of reserving a hearing at least 60 days before trial will not be altered in
`
`the event that the trial date is modified due to COVID-19 restrictions. This case will proceed on
`
`the currently set schedule through the final pretrial conference regardless of trial continuances
`
`caused by court closure.
`
`The parties may include these motions “in their final pretrial motions in limine.” Standing
`
`Order Re Civil Case § IV.A.2. The Court reminds the parties that they are “limited to 5 pretrial
`
`motions in limine of 5 pages each.” Id.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: January 22, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`______________________________________
`BETH LABSON FREEMAN
`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
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`