Case 5:20-cv-09341-EJD Document 131 Filed 03/02/22 Page 1 of 3
`
`
`
`
`
`YAR R. CHAIKOVSKY (SB# 175421)
`yarchaikovsky@paulhastings.com
`PHILIP OU (SB# 259896)
`philipou@paulhastings.com
`JOSEPH J. RUMPLER, II (SB# 296941)
`josephrumpler@paulhastings.com
`DAVID OKANO (SB#278485)
`davidokano@paulhastings.com
`ANDY LEGOLVAN (SB# 292520)
`andylegolvan@paulhastings.com
`BORIS LUBARSKY (SB# 324896)
`borislubarsky@paulhastings.com
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`1117 S. California Avenue
`Palo Alto, California 94304-1106
`Telephone: 1(650) 320-1800
`Facsimile: 1(650) 320-1900
`
`MATTHIAS KAMBER (SB#232147)
`matthiaskamber@paulhastings.com
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`101 California Street, 48th Floor
`San Francisco, California 94111
`Telephone: 1(415) 856-7000
`Facsimile: 1(415) 856-7100
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`DEMARAY LLC,
`Defendant.
`
`CASE NO. 5:20-cv-09341-EJD
`APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.’S
`MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR
`AN EARLIER HEARING OR FOR
`DETERMINATION ON THE PAPERS
`ON APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.’S
`MOTION TO STRIKE (DKT. NO. 130)
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 5:20-cv-09341-EJD Document 131 Filed 03/02/22 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Applied Materials, Inc. (“Applied”) respectfully moves the Court, pursuant to Civil
`Local Rule 6-3, for an order for an earlier hearing on Applied’s Motion to Strike (“Motion to
`Strike”), Dkt. No. 130, or in the alternative, pursuant to L.R. 7-1(b) for Applied’s Motion to Strike
`to be decided on the papers. Demaray has indicated that it does not oppose the Court hearing the
`Motion to Strike sooner if it is able to do so.
`As explained in the Motion to Strike, Demaray has improperly sought leave from Magistrate
`Judge Cousins through a two-page letter brief to assert infringement claims against Applied nearly
`six months after it filed its Answer and decided not to file compulsory claims of infringement in
`this case. Demaray’s letter brief violates Local Rule 7-1(a), as leave must be sought through a
`noticed motion whereby Applied is entitled to file an opposition under Local Rule 7-3(a).
`Demaray’s letter brief is also procedurally improper as the issue has not been referred by the Court
`to Magistrate Judge Cousins to decide. Compounding the problem, pending before Magistrate
`Judge Cousins is a dispute regarding the case schedule where Demaray has proposed further
`delaying claim construction deadlines by proposing to “reset” those deadlines “if affirmative
`infringement claims are allowed.” The parties filed their Joint Claim Construction and Pre-Hearing
`Statement on February 1, 2022, Dkt. No. 126, and Applied is preparing to file its Opening Claim
`Construction Brief on or before March 18, 2022, the deadline under the Patent Local Rules (forty-
`five days after the filing of Joint Claim Construction and Pre-Hearing Statement). There is no
`reason to further delay claim construction from proceeding.
`Currently the next available hearing date for Applied’s Motion to Strike is June 30, 2022
`(nearly four months from now). Delaying resolution on Applied’s Motion to Strike, which simply
`addresses whether Demaray’s letter brief is procedurally improper and prejudicial, until afterthat
`time is prejudicial to Applied as it would potentially allow Demaray to continue relying on the
`uncertainty as to whether it can bring infringement claims to delay this case from moving forward.
`Accordingly, Applied respectfully believes, pursuant to L.R. 7-1(b), that Applied’s Motion to Strike
`should be decided on the papers. To the extent the Court believes a hearing to decide Applied’s
`Motion is needed, Applied respectfully requests that the Court grant an expedited hearing at least
`14 days after Applied’s reply (due March 23, 2022), or as soon as the Court is available thereafter.
`APPLIED’S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME
`
`AND EARLIER HEARING
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 5:20-cv-09341-EJD Document 131 Filed 03/02/22 Page 3 of 3
`
`
`
`In consideration of judicial economy, conservation of the parties’ resources, and allowing
`this case’s deadlines to promptly proceed, Applied respectfully requests the Court grant this Motion
`and set the hearing date as soon as the Court is available thereafter or to rule on Applied’s Motion
`to Strike on the papers.
`
`DATED: March 2, 2022
`
`
`YAR R. CHAIKOVSKY
`MATTHIAS KAMBER
`PHILIP OU
`JOSEPH J. RUMPLER, II
`DAVID OKANO
`ANDY LEGOLVAN
`BORIS LUBARSKY
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`By: /s/ Philip Ou
`
`PHILIP OU
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`APPLIED MATERIALS
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`APPLIED’S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME
`AND EARLIER HEARING
`
`