`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1795-GMS
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1796-GMS
`:
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`AMAZON.COM, INC.,
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`APPLE, INC.,
`
`:
`Defendant.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`:
`Defendant.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1797-GMS
`:
`ASUSTEK COMPUTER, INC. and ASUS :
`COMPUTER INTERNATIONAL,
`
`::
`
`:
`Defendants.
`__________________________________ :
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-01984-GMS Document 28 Filed 10/01/14 Page 2 of 8 PageID #: 407
`
`::
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1798-GMS
`:
`BLACKBERRY LTD. and BLACKBERRY :
`CORPORATION,
`
`::
`
`:
`Defendants.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1799-GMS
`:
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`FUHU, INC.,
`
`:
`Defendant.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1800-GMS
`:
`:
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`FUJITSU LIMITED and FUJITSU
`AMERICA, INC.,
`
`:
`Defendants.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1801-GMS
`:
`:
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`GOOGLE, INC. and MOTOROLA
`MOBILITY, LLC,
`
`:
`Defendants.
`__________________________________ :
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-01984-GMS Document 28 Filed 10/01/14 Page 3 of 8 PageID #: 408
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1983-GMS
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1802-GMS
`:
`:
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`HISENSE USA CORPORATION,
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`HTC CORPORATION and HTC
`AMERICA, INC.,
`
`:
`Defendant.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`:
`Defendants.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1803-GMS
`:
`:
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`HUAWEI DEVICE USA, INC. and
`FUTUREWEI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`
`:
`Defendants.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1804-GMS
`:
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`INTEL CORPORATION,
`
`:
`Defendant.
`__________________________________ :
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-01984-GMS Document 28 Filed 10/01/14 Page 4 of 8 PageID #: 409
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1805-GMS
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1806-GMS
`:
`:
`:
`:
`
`:
`Defendant.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`LENOVO (UNITED STATES) INC.,
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC., LG
`ELECTRONICS, USA, INC., and LG
`ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM
`USA, INC.,
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
`
`:
`:
`Defendants.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1984-GMS
`:
`
`::
`
`:
`Defendant.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1807-GMS
`:
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS,
`
`:
`Defendant.
`__________________________________ :
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-01984-GMS Document 28 Filed 10/01/14 Page 5 of 8 PageID #: 410
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1808-GMS
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1809-GMS
`:
`:
`:
`:
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,
`LLC; and SAMSUNG
`TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,
`LLC,
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SONY CORPORATION, SONY
`ELECTRONICS, INC., SONY MOBILE
`COMMUNICATIONS (USA) INC., and
`SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS AB,
`
`:
`Defendants.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`:
`Defendants.
`__________________________________ :
`:
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1810-GMS
`:
`:
`:
`
`::
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`TOSHIBA CORPORATION and
`TOSHIBA AMERICA INFORMATION
`SYSTEMS, INC.,
`
`:
`Defendants.
`__________________________________ :
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-01984-GMS Document 28 Filed 10/01/14 Page 6 of 8 PageID #: 411
`
`::
`
`::
`
`: C. A. No. 13-1811-GMS
`:
`:
`
`MEMORY INTEGRITY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`ZTE CORPORATION and ZTE (USA)
`INC.,
`
`::
`
`:
`Defendants.
`__________________________________ :
`
`ORDER
`
`At Wilmington, this 1st day of October , 2014
`
`IT IS ORDERED as follows:
`
`1. On or before Wednesday, October 22, 2014, each party or each party
`
`group shall email to Chief Magistrate Judge Thynge, with a copy to her Judicial
`
`Administrator, Cathleen Kennedy, the following information:
`
`a. Whether any discussions have occurred between plaintiff and a
`
`defendant/defendant group regarding settlement; roughly when those discussions
`
`occurred; who was included/involved in those discussions (e.g., principals or party
`
`representations, in house counsel, outside counsel, etc.); status of the settlement
`
`discussions; and, if applicable, the party’s understanding why discussions ended, or
`
`why they have not occurred. Plaintiff will need to address this provision for each
`
`defendant or each defendant group.
`
`b. Timing of when a party believes mediation would be most
`
`beneficial/productive (e.g., pre- or post-claims construction briefing after Markman but
`
`before any decisions, after a Markman decision is rendered, before expert reports etc.)
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-01984-GMS Document 28 Filed 10/01/14 Page 7 of 8 PageID #: 412
`
`and a brief explanation why.1 When referencing events in the scheduling order, include
`
`dates.
`
`c. Whether there are additional matters/issues (e.g. indemnity from
`
`non-parties, related matters in this or other jurisdictions) of which the court should be
`
`aware affecting a party’s position on mediation and the timing of mediation.2
`
`d. For each defendant or defendant group who has received a
`
`settlement demand or engaged in settlement discussions where settlement numbers
`
`were raised, a summary of its impressions/comments/thoughts regarding plaintiff’s
`
`proposal for settlement, or its counterproposal. Each defendant/defendant group shall
`
`advise if any follow up teleconferences are to occur whether they wish them to be
`
`confidential and the order not docketed.
`
`e. If not included in the header of the email (e.g. the “To” or “CC”
`
`sections), counsel are to provide in their respective email responses, the email
`
`addresses of those who are to be included or copied on any subsequent responses by
`
`the court.
`
`not required.
`
`2. The emails are confidential and copying other parties in this litigation is
`
`3. In composing their email submissions, the parties should consider that
`
`the purpose for the information ordered is to enable the court to determine whether,
`
`when and with whom follow up discussions regarding mediation should occur.
`
`Local counsel are reminded of their obligations to inform out-of-state
`
`1 Depending on the information in response to paragraph 1, plaintiff may need to
`address this provision for each defendant or each defendant group.
`2 Depending on the information in response to the previous paragraphs, plaintiff
`may need to address this provision for each defendant or each defendant group.
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-01984-GMS Document 28 Filed 10/01/14 Page 8 of 8 PageID #: 413
`
`counsel of this order. To avoid imposition of sanctions, counsel shall advise the Court
`
`immediately of any problems regarding compliance with this Order.
`
`
`
`/s/ Mary Pat Thynge
`UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE