Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 127
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`HOLOGIC, INC., a Delaware corporation; and
`CYTYC SURGICAL PRODUCTS, LLC, a
`Massachusetts limited liability company,
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`MINERVA SURGICAL, INC., a Delaware
`corporation,
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
` C.A. No. 20-925-JFB-SRF
`
`
`
`
`
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`
`This _____ day of October, 2020, the Court having conducted an initial Rule 16 scheduling
`
`and planning conference pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b) and Local Rule 16.1
`
`on September 22, 2020, and the parties having determined after discussion that the matter cannot
`
`be resolved at this juncture by settlement, voluntary mediation, or binding arbitration;
`
`IT IS ORDERED that:
`
`[Hologic’s Proposal: One related case is pending in this District: Hologic, Inc. et al. v.
`
`Minerva Surgical, Inc., No. 1:15-cv-1031-JFB-SRF (D. Del.). Another case asserted by Defendant
`
`against Plaintiff, Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. et al., No. 1:18-cv-217-JFB-SRF (D.
`
`Del.), is not related because it involves a different patent and different accused product.]
`
`[Minerva’s Proposal: The following schedule may need to be revisited and modified
`
`depending on developments in the other two cases pending in this District between the parties
`
`including: when the Court sets the date for the in-person jury trial in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v.
`
`Hologic, Inc. et al., No. 1:18-cv-217-JFB-SRF (D. Del.); and when the Supreme Court takes action
`
`on Minerva’s petition for certiorari in the appeal concerning Hologic, Inc. et al v. Minerva
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 2 of 16 PageID #: 128
`
`
`
`Surgical, Inc., 1:15-cv-1031-JFB-SRF (D. Del.). Minerva’s petition for certiorari was filed on
`
`October 1, 2020.]
`
`1.
`
`Joinder of Other Parties and Amendment of Pleadings. All motions to join
`
`other parties, and to amend or supplement the pleadings shall be filed on or before [Hologic’s
`
`Proposal: December 17, 2020] [Minerva’s Proposal: February 22, 2021].
`
`2.
`
`Discovery.
`
`All discovery exchanged in Hologic, Inc. v. Minerva Surgical, Inc., No. 15-1031-JFB-SRF
`
`(D. Del.) (the “First Action”) and Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., No. 18-cv-00217-JFB-
`
`SRF (D. Del.) (the “Minerva Action”) is deemed to have been exchanged in this action.
`
`[Hologic’s Proposal: All discovery in this case shall be initiated so that it will be
`
`completed on or before December 30, 2020.]
`
`[Minerva’s Proposal: All discovery in this case shall be initiated so that it will be
`
`completed on or before September 10, 2021. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the
`
`limitations on discovery set forth in Local Rule 26.1 shall be strictly observed.]
`
`a.
`
`Rule 26(a)(1) Initial Disclosures. Unless otherwise agreed to by the parties,
`
`the parties shall make their initial disclosures pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1)
`
`[Hologic’s Proposal: within five (5) days of the date of this Order] [Minerva’s Proposal: October
`
`26, 2020].
`
`b.
`
`E-Discovery Default Standard. If they have not already done so, the parties
`
`are to review the Default Standard for Discovery of Electronic Documents, which is posted on
`
`Magistrate Judge Fallon’s section of the Court’s website (http://www.ded.uscourts.gov) under the
`
`“Guidelines” tab, and is incorporated herein by reference with the following deadlines:
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 3 of 16 PageID #: 129
`
`
`
`i.
`
`The parties shall make their disclosures under Default Standard for
`
`Discovery, Paragraph 3, [Hologic’s Proposal: within five (5) days of the date of this Order]
`
`[Minerva’s Proposal: on November 11, 2020].
`
`ii.
`
`Identification of Accused Products. By [Hologic’s Proposal:
`
`October 19, 2020] [Minerva’s Proposal: November 11, 2020], Plaintiffs will provide disclosures
`
`under Default Standard for Discovery, Paragraph 4.a.
`
`iii.
`
`Core Technical Documents. [Hologic’s Proposal1: In the First
`
`Action, Minerva represented to this Court that its commercialized “New Minerva Handpiece” had
`
`the same functionality as its NEW PIVOT device from the First Action. During post-trial briefing,
`
`Minerva relied on the expert report and an opinion of its patent counsel, Burt Magen, to argue that
`
`its redesigned “New Minerva Handpiece” incorporated the NEW PIVOT handle redesign. (See
`
`First Action, D.I. 549 at 9 (“As of September 18, 2018, Minerva is shipping only the redesign. Ex.
`
`R. This redesign does not have a handle with a ‘pivot point’ as required by the ’348 patent. D.I.
`
`321-1, Ex. 164 [Magen Rebuttal Expert Report]; D.I. 293-5, Ex. 110 [Magen Opinion Letter].”).)
`
`Critically, Mr. Magen admitted that Minerva’s “New Minerva Handpiece” did not function any
`
`differently than the NEW PIVOT redesign upon which he originally opined in the January 2017
`
`Opinion Letter. (See First Action, D.I. 321-1, Ex. 164, ¶ 18 (“In sum, the change to use a flat
`
`spring in the handle does not change the functionality of the New Minerva Handpiece.
`
`Accordingly, the change to use a flat spring in the handle does not impact or change in any way
`
`my opinions set forth herein or in my January 20, 2017 Opinion.”); see also id. at ¶ 13 (“I have
`
`
`1 Hologic had hoped to abide by the Magistrate Judge’s admonition not to include argument in this
`revised proposed scheduling order, but Minerva asserted for the first time in a Saturday draft that
`its commercialized New Pivot design is somehow different than its prior New Pivot device from
`the first action between the parties. Hologic points out that this position is contrary to Minerva’s
`prior assertions to this Court and the Federal Circuit.
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 4 of 16 PageID #: 130
`
`
`
`been informed that for manufacturability and reliability reasons, Minerva has recently made one
`
`change to its design of the handle for the New Minerva Handpiece. See MSI00299672;
`
`MSI00299673. The change was to replace the spring alignment component and the torsion spring
`
`(MSI00145100) in the handle to a flat spring (MSI00299673).”); id. at ¶ 45 (admitting that the
`
`prototype of the handpiece labeled NEW PIVOT “includes the new design relating to the pivot
`
`issue”).) Minerva made these same representations to the Federal Circuit. (See No. 19-2054 (Fed.
`
`Cir.), D.I. 27 at 85-86 (arguing Minerva’s commercialized handpiece did not infringe the ’348
`
`Patent because it contains the NEW PIVOT handpiece design and citing Magen’s Rebuttal Report
`
`and Opinion Letter in support).) Accordingly, this Court should prohibit Minerva from arguing
`
`the opposite in an effort to delay adjudication. For this reason, Defendant does not need to provide
`
`a Core Technical Document production under Default Standard for Discovery, Paragraph 4.b. If
`
`the Court permits re-litigation of this issue, Hologic includes a proposal below for core technical
`
`document production and abbreviated expert discovery.] [Minerva’s Proposal: In accordance
`
`with the Court’s ruling that the Parties are to provide “no briefing” in this proposed order
`
`(Transcript of Rule 16 Scheduling Conference (Sep. 22, 2020) at 23:7-10), Minerva will refrain
`
`from responding substantively to Hologic’s argument regarding whether the Parties need a core
`
`technical document production. Instead, Minerva’s simply states that it disagrees with Hologic’s
`
`argument, including the characterizations of statements and evidence therein, and respectfully
`
`requests the opportunity to respond substantively, if the Court is inclined to entertain Hologic’s
`
`argument.]
`
`By [Hologic’s Proposal: November 2, 2020] [Minerva’s Proposal: December 11, 2020],
`
`Defendant must produce core technical documents in accordance with Default Standard for
`
`Discovery, Paragraph 4.b.
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 5 of 16 PageID #: 131
`
`
`
`iv.
`
`Infringement Contentions. By [Hologic’s Proposal: November 23,
`
`2020] [Minerva’s Proposal: January 8, 2021], Plaintiffs will provide disclosures under Default
`
`Standard for Discovery, Paragraph 4.c.
`
`v.
`
`Invalidity Contentions. [Hologic’s Proposal: Because Defendant is
`
`estopped from asserting invalidity, Defendant need not provide disclosures under Default Standard
`
`for Discovery, Paragraph 4.d.] [Minerva’s Proposal: Defendant must serve initial invalidity
`
`contentions, if any, on February 8, 2021 or 30 days after all appeals from the First Case are
`
`exhausted, whichever is later.]
`
`c.
`
`Document Production. Document production shall be completed on or
`
`before [Hologic’s Proposal: December 14, 2020] [Minerva’s Proposal: May 24, 2021].
`
`d.
`
`Interrogatories. A maximum of [Hologic’s Proposal: 2 interrogatories
`
`shall be served by each party to any other party] [Minerva’s Proposal: 10 interrogatories shall be
`
`served by each party to any other party].
`
`e.
`
`Contention Interrogatories. In the absence of agreement among the parties,
`
`contention interrogatories, if filed, shall first be addressed by the party with the burden of proof no
`
`later than the date established for the completion of document production, with the responsive
`
`answers due within thirty (30) days thereof. The adequacy of all such interrogatory answers shall
`
`be judged by the level of detail each party provides; i.e., the more detail a party provides, the more
`
`detail a party shall receive.
`
`f.
`
`Requests for Admission. A maximum of 10 requests for admission shall be
`
`served by each party to any other party.
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 6 of 16 PageID #: 132
`
`
`
`g.
`
`Depositions.
`
`i.
`
`Timing. In the absence of agreement among the parties or by order
`
`of the Court, no deposition (other than those noticed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6)) shall be
`
`scheduled prior to the completion of document production.
`
`ii.
`
`Limitation on Hours for Deposition Discovery. Each side is limited
`
`to a maximum of [Hologic’s Proposal: 15 hours for taking fact depositions and a maximum four
`
`persons] [Minerva’s Proposal: 30 hours for taking fact depositions].
`
`iii.
`
`Location of Depositions. Any party or representative (officer,
`
`director, or managing agent) of a party filing a civil action in this District Court must ordinarily be
`
`required, upon request, to submit to a deposition at a place designated within this district.
`
`Exceptions to this general rule may be made by order of the Court. A defendant who becomes a
`
`counterclaimant, cross-claimant, or third-party plaintiff shall be considered as having filed an
`
`action in this Court for the purpose of this provision. In view of the COVID-19 pandemic,
`
`depositions may be taken by videoconference.
`
`h.
`
`Disclosure of Expert Testimony.
`
`[Hologic’s Proposal: The expert reports from the First Action are deemed to have been
`
`served in this action, and the experts may testify in this action based on those reports.] [Minerva’s
`
`Proposal: Omit this section.]
`
`i.
`
`For the party who has the initial burden of proof on the subject
`
`matter, the initial Federal Rule 26(a)(2) disclosure of expert testimony is due on or before
`
`[Hologic’s Proposal: January 18, 2021] [Minerva’s Proposal: October 15, 2021].
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 7 of 16 PageID #: 133
`
`
`
`ii.
`
`The supplemental disclosure to contradict or rebut evidence on the
`
`same matter identified by another party is due on or before [Hologic’s Proposal: February 8,
`
`2021] [Minerva’s Proposal: November 19, 2021].
`
`iii.
`
`Reply expert reports from the party with the initial burden of proof
`
`are due on or before [Hologic’s Proposal: February 22, 2021] [Minerva’s Proposal: December
`
`14, 2021].
`
`iv.
`
`No other expert reports will be permitted without either the consent
`
`of all parties or leave of the Court. Along with the submissions of the expert reports, the parties
`
`shall advise of the dates and times of their experts’ availability for deposition.
`
`v.
`
`Expert discovery, including any depositions of expert witnesses,
`
`must be completed by [Hologic’s Proposal: March 8, 2021] [Minerva’s Proposal: January 18,
`
`2022].
`
`vi.
`
`Objections to Expert Testimony. To the extent any objection to
`
`expert testimony is made pursuant to the principles announced in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm.,
`
`Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), as incorporated in Federal Rule of Evidence 702, it shall be made by
`
`motion no later than the deadline for dispositive motions set forth herein, unless otherwise ordered
`
`by the Court.
`
`i.
`
`[Hologic’s Proposal: Fact Witnesses to be Called at Trial.
`
`i.
`
`By February 22, 2021, each party shall serve on the other parties a
`
`list of each fact witness (including any expert witness who is also expected to give fact testimony),
`
`who has previously been disclosed during discovery and that it intends to call at trial.
`
`ii.
`
`By March 1, 2021, each party shall serve a list of each rebuttal fact
`
`witness that it intends to call at trial.
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 8 of 16 PageID #: 134
`
`
`
`iii.
`
`The parties shall have the right to depose any such fact witnesses
`
`who have not previously been deposed in this case. Such deposition shall be held by March 29,
`
`2021, and shall be limited to three (3) hours per side in the aggregate unless extended by agreement
`
`of the parties or upon order of the Court upon good cause shown.] [Minerva’s Proposal: Omit
`
`this section.]
`
`j.
`
`Discovery Matters and Disputes Relating to Protective Orders.
`
`i.
`
`Should counsel find they are unable to resolve a discovery matter or
`
`those other matters covered by this paragraph,2 the moving party (i.e., the party seeking relief from
`
`the Court) shall file a “[Joint] Motion for Teleconference To Resolve [Protective Order or
`
`Discovery] Dispute.” The suggested text for this motion can be found in Magistrate Judge Fallon’s
`
`section of the Court’s website in the “Forms” tab, under the heading “Discovery Matters–Motion
`
`to Resolve Discovery Disputes.”
`
`ii.
`
`The Court will thereafter order a discovery telephone conference
`
`and deadlines for submissions. On the date set by the Court, generally not less than seventy-two
`
`(72) hours prior to the conference, excluding weekends and holidays, the party seeking relief shall
`
`file with the Court a letter, not to exceed four (4) pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining the
`
`issues in dispute and its position on those issues. This submission shall include a proposed order,
`
`attached as an exhibit, setting out the nature of the relief requested.
`
`iii.
`
`On the date set by the Court, generally not less than forty-eight (48)
`
`hours prior to the conference, excluding weekends and holidays, any party opposing the
`
`
`2 Counsel are expected to verbally discuss the issues/concerns before seeking the Court’s
`intervention.
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 9 of 16 PageID #: 135
`
`
`
`application for relief may file a letter, not to exceed four (4) pages, in no less than 12-point font,
`
`outlining that party’s reason for its opposition.
`
`iv.
`
`Two (2) courtesy copies of the letters are to be hand delivered to the
`
`Clerk’s Office within one hour of e-filing. All courtesy copies shall be double-sided.
`
`v.
`
`Should the Court find further briefing necessary upon conclusion of
`
`the telephone conference, the Court will order it.
`
`vi.
`
`Disputes or issues regarding protective orders, or motions for
`
`extension of time for briefing case dispositive motions which are related to discovery matters are
`
`to be addressed in accordance with this paragraph.
`
`3.
`
`Application to Court for Protective Order. The Protective Order in the First
`
`Action (First Action, D.I. 140) applies in this action as if entered herein.
`
`4.
`
`Papers Filed Under Seal. When filing papers under seal, counsel should deliver
`
`to the Clerk an original and one (1) copy of the papers. In accordance with section G of the
`
`Administrative Procedures Governing Filing and Service by Electronic Means, a redacted version
`
`of any sealed document shall be filed electronically within seven (7) days of the filing of the sealed
`
`document.
`
`5.
`
`Courtesy Copies. The parties shall provide to the Court two (2) courtesy copies
`
`of all briefs and one (1) courtesy copy of any other document filed in support of any briefs (i.e.,
`
`appendices, exhibits, declarations, affidavits, etc.). This provision also applies to papers filed
`
`under seal.
`
`6.
`
`ADR Process. This matter will be discussed during the Rule 16 scheduling
`
`conference.
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 10 of 16 PageID #: 136
`
`
`
`7.
`
`Interim Status Report. On [Hologic’s Proposal: December 21, 2020]
`
`[Minerva’s Proposal: August 6, 2021], counsel shall submit a joint interim report to the Court on
`
`the nature of the matters in issue and the progress of discovery to date.
`
`8.
`
`Status Conference. On [Hologic’s Proposal: December 28, 2020] [Minerva’s
`
`Proposal: a date during the week of August 16, 2021], the Court will hold a Rule 16(a), (b) and
`
`(c) conference by telephone with counsel beginning at 1:00 p.m., or at the Court’s convenience.
`
`Plaintiff’s counsel shall initiate the telephone call. At the time of this conference, counsel shall
`
`also be prepared to discuss the progress, if any, of settlement discussions and shall be prepared to
`
`discuss the possibility of setting up a settlement conference with the Court, counsel and their
`
`clients. If all parties agree that there is nothing to report, nor anything to add to the interim status
`
`report or to this order, they shall notify the Court in writing before the conference is scheduled to
`
`occur, and the conference will be taken off of the Court’s calendar.
`
`9.
`
`Claim Construction Issue Identification.
`
` The Court’s previous claim
`
`construction ruling and the parties’ previous agreement (First Action, D.I. 227; D.I. 155), and the
`
`Federal Circuit’s ruling relating thereto (First Action, D.I. 635-1), are deemed to be the Court’s
`
`claim construction decision in the present case.
`
`10.
`
`Early Summary Judgment Motions. Prior to filing any summary judgment
`
`motion in advance of the deadline set forth in Paragraph 11, any party seeking leave to do so must
`
`submit a letter brief seeking permission to file the motion. The opening letter brief shall be no
`
`longer than five (5) pages and shall be filed with the Court no later than [Hologic’s Proposal:
`
`October 16, 2020] [Minerva’s Proposal: March 10, 2021]. Answering letter briefs shall be no
`
`longer than five (5) pages and filed with the Court no later than [Hologic’s Proposal: October 30,
`
`2020] [Minerva’s Proposal: March 24, 2021].
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 11 of 16 PageID #: 137
`
`
`
`[Hologic’s Proposal: If the Court determines that argument is necessary to assist in the
`
`resolution of any request to file an early summary judgment motion, it shall notify the parties of
`
`the date and time on which the Court will conduct a telephone conference to hear such argument.
`
`To the extent permitted, all summary judgment motions shall be served and filed within two weeks
`
`of the Court’s decision to permit the filing of such motions. Briefing will be presented pursuant
`
`to the Court’s Local Rules. The parties may agree on an alternative briefing schedule. Any such
`
`agreement shall be in writing and filed with the Court for the Court’s approval.]
`
`[Minerva’s Proposal: Omit this section.]
`
`11.
`
`Case Dispositive Motions. All case dispositive motions, an opening brief, and
`
`affidavits, if any, in support of the motion shall be served and filed on or before [Hologic’s
`
`Proposal: March 22, 2021] [Minerva’s Proposal: February 22, 2022]. Briefing will be presented
`
`pursuant to the Court’s Local Rules, except as modified as follows: (i) [Hologic’s Proposal:
`
`responsive briefs are due April 12, 2021, and reply briefs are due April 26, 2021] [Minerva’s
`
`Proposal: responsive briefs are due March 22, 2022, and reply briefs are due April 5, 2022]; and
`
`(ii) [Hologic’s Proposal: all issues presented for summary judgment shall be set forth in a single
`
`opening brief per party not to exceed 30 pages, with responsive briefs not to exceed 30 pages, and
`
`reply briefs not to exceed 20 pages] [Minerva’s Proposal: sixty (60) days before dispositive
`
`motions are due the parties will meet and confer about pages limits for summary judgment
`
`briefing.] If the matter is scheduled for a bench trial, no case dispositive motions shall be filed
`
`without prior authorization of the Court. No case-dispositive motion under Rule 56 may be filed
`
`more than ten (10) days before the above date without leave of the Court.
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 12 of 16 PageID #: 138
`
`
`
`Any reference to exhibits in the briefs must refer to the specific pages of the exhibit
`
`proffered in support of a party’s argument. If the exhibit is a deposition, both the page and line
`
`numbers must be specified.3
`
`12.
`
`Applications by Motion. Except as otherwise specified herein, any application to
`
`the Court shall be by written motion filed with the Clerk. Any non-dispositive motion should
`
`contain the statement required by Local Rule 7.1.1.
`
`13.
`
`Pretrial Conference. On [Hologic’s Proposal: July 6, 2021] [Minerva’s
`
`Proposal: a day during the week starting June 27, 2022], the Court will hold a Pretrial Conference
`
`in Court with counsel beginning at 1:00 p.m., or at the Court’s convenience. Unless otherwise
`
`ordered by the Court, the parties should assume that filing the pretrial order satisfies the pretrial
`
`disclosure requirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3). The parties shall file with the
`
`Court the joint proposed final pretrial order with the information required by the form of Final
`
`Pretrial Order which accompanies this Scheduling Order on or before [Hologic’s Proposal: June
`
`21, 2021] [Minerva’s Proposal: June 20, 2022]. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the
`
`parties shall comply with the time frames set forth in Local Rule 16.3(d)(1)-(3) for the preparation
`
`of the joint proposed final pretrial order,
`
`[Hologic’s Proposal: except that the following deadlines apply:
`
`Parties exchange list of witnesses, exhibits, and deposition
`testimony they intend to use at trial
`Parties exchange list of rebuttal witnesses, exhibits, and
`deposition testimony they intend to use at trial
`Deadline for depositions of witnesses not previously
`deposed
`
`]
`
`2/22/2021
`
`3/1/2021
`
`3/29/2021
`
`
`3 For example, a reference to an exhibit that refers to the entire document will not be accepted and
`is not consistent with this provision.
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 13 of 16 PageID #: 139
`
`
`
`2022.]
`
`[Minerva’s Proposal: with the Parties to meet and confer on pre-trial issues on May 3,
`
`The Court will advise the parties at or before the above-scheduled pretrial conference
`
`whether an additional pretrial conference will be necessary.
`
`14. Motions in Limine. Motions in limine shall not be separately filed. All in limine
`
`requests and responses thereto shall be set forth in the proposed pretrial order. Each party shall be
`
`limited to three (3) in limine requests, unless otherwise permitted by the Court. The in limine
`
`request and any response shall contain the authorities relied upon; each in limine request may be
`
`supported by a maximum of three (3) pages of argument and may be opposed by a maximum of
`
`three (3) pages of argument, and the party making the in limine request may add a maximum of
`
`one (1) additional page in reply in support of its request. If more than one party is supporting or
`
`opposing an in limine request, such support or opposition shall be combined in a single three (3)
`
`page submission (and, if the moving party, a single one (1) page reply), unless otherwise ordered
`
`by the Court. No separate briefing shall be submitted on in limine requests, unless otherwise
`
`permitted by the Court.
`
`15.
`
`Jury Instructions, Voir Dire, and Special Verdict Forms. Where a case is to be
`
`tried to a jury, pursuant to Local Rules 47 and 51 the parties should file joint (i) proposed voir
`
`dire, (ii) preliminary jury instructions, (iii) final jury instructions, and (iv) special verdict forms
`
`three (3) full business days before the final pretrial conference. That submission shall be
`
`accompanied by a computer diskette containing each of the foregoing four (4) documents in
`
`WordPerfect format.
`
`16.
`
`Trial. This matter is scheduled for a [Hologic’s Proposal: 3-day jury trial
`
`beginning at 9:30 a.m. on July 19, 2021]; [Minerva’s Proposal: 5-day jury trial beginning at 9:30
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 14 of 16 PageID #: 140
`
`
`
`a.m. the week of July 18, 2022], with the subsequent trial days beginning at 9:00 a.m. The trial
`
`will be timed, as counsel will be allocated a total number of hours in which to present their
`
`respective cases.
`
`
`
`/s/
`UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 15 of 16 PageID #: 141
`
`
`
`TABLE OF SCHEDULING DATES
`
`Minerva’s Proposal
`Hologic’s Proposal
`9/22/2020
`
`Event
`Date of Rule 16 Scheduling
`Conference
`Initial Disclosures under Federal
`Rules
`Disclosures under Delaware
`Default Standard for Discovery ¶ 3
`
`Identify Accused Products
`(Default Standard for Discovery ¶
`4.a.)
`Core Technical Document
`Production
`(Default Standard for Discovery ¶
`4.b.)
`Preliminary Infringement
`Contentions
`(Default Standard for Discovery ¶
`4.c.)
`Initial Invalidity Contentions
`(Default Standard for Discovery ¶
`4.d.)
`
`Joinder of Other Parties and
`Amendment of Pleadings
`Opening Brief(s) re Permission for
`Early Summary Judgment
`Responsive Brief(s) re Permission
`for Early Summary Judgment
`Completion of Document
`Production
`Interim Status Report
`Status Conference
`Fact Discovery Cutoff
`
`5 days after the date of the
`Scheduling Order
`5 days after the date of the
`Scheduling Order
`
`10/19/2020
`
`11/2/2020
`
`10/26/2020
`
`11/11/2020
`
`11/11/2020
`
`12/11/2020
`
`11/23/2020
`
`1/8/2021
`
`2/8/2021 or
`30 days after all appeals
`from the First Case are
`exhausted, whichever is
`later
`2/22/2021
`
`3/10/2021
`
`3/24/2021
`
`5/24/2021
`
`8/6/2021
`Week of 8/16/2021
`9/10/2021
`
`omit
`
`12/17/2020
`
`10/16/2020
`
`10/30/2020
`
`12/14/2020
`
`12/21/2020
`12/28/2020
`12/30/2020
`
`-15-
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00925-JFB-SRF Document 17 Filed 10/06/20 Page 16 of 16 PageID #: 142
`
`Event
`Opening Expert Reports
`(issues on which party has initial
`burden of proof)
`Responsive Expert Reports
`Reply Expert Reports
`Close of Expert Discovery
`Dispositive Motions
`Answering briefs to case
`dispositive motions
`Reply briefs to case dispositive
`motions
`Deadline for parties to meet and
`confer on pre-trial issues
`Parties exchange list of witnesses,
`exhibits, and deposition testimony
`they intend to use at trial
`
`Parties exchange list of rebuttal
`witnesses, exhibits, and deposition
`testimony they intend to use at
`trial
`
`Deadline for depositions of
`witnesses not previously deposed
`Joint proposed pre-trial order
`
`Parties file joint (i) proposed voir
`dire, (ii) preliminary jury
`instructions, (iii) final jury
`instructions, and (iv) special
`verdict forms
`Pretrial Conference
`Jury Trial
`
`Hologic’s Proposal
`1/18/2021
`
`Minerva’s Proposal
`10/15/2012
`
`2/8/2021
`2/22/2021
`3/8/2021
`3/22/2021
`4/12/2021
`
`4/26/2021
`
`
`
`2/22/2021
`
`3/1/2021
`
`3/29/2021
`
`6/21/2021
`
`11/19/2021
`12/14/2021
`1/18/2022
`2/22/2022
`03/22/2022
`
`04/05/2022
`
`5/3/2022
`
`omit
`(Parties to meet and confer
`on pre-trial issues (see
`above))
`omit
`(Parties to meet and confer
`on pre-trial issues (see
`above))
`omit
`
`6/20/2022
`
`Three business days before the pre-trial conference
`
`Week of 7/6/2021
`7/19/2021
`3 days
`
`Week of 6/27/2022
`7/18/2022
`5 days
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-16-
`
`