Case 2:13-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 52 Filed 06/02/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 9230
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 2:13-cv-103-JRG-RSP
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`ALFONSO CIOFFI, an individual,
`MELANIE ROZMAN, an individual,
`MEGAN ROZMAN, an individual, and
`MORGAN ROZMAN, an individual,
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`vs.
`
`GOOGLE, INC.
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`PATENT LOCAL RULE 4-3 JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND
`PREHEARING STATEMENT
`
`Pursuant to local Patent Local Rule 4-3 of the United States District Court for the
`
`Eastern District of Texas and the Court’s Docket Control Order (Dkt No. 32), entered
`
`September 26, 2013, Plaintiffs Alfonso Cioffi, Melanie Rozman, Megan Rozman, and Morgan
`
`Rozman (together, “Plaintiffs”) and Defendant Google, Inc. (“Defendant”) (collectively, the
`
`“Parties”), file this Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement. Plaintiffs and
`
`Defendant will be addressing the claim terms of asserted U.S. Patent No. RE43,103 (the “’103
`
`patent”), U.S. Patent No. RE43,528 (the “’528 patent”), U.S. Patent No. RE43,529 (the “529
`
`Patent”), and U.S. Patent No. RE43,500 (the “500 Patent”) (collectively, the “patents-in-suit”).
`
`A. Agreed Upon Claim Terms, Phrases or Clauses (P.R. 4-3(a)).
`
`The Parties agree upon the following terms, phrases or clauses:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Google - Exhibit 1010, page 1
`
`

`
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 52 Filed 06/02/14 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 9231
`
`RE500 – claim 41
`
`The preamble is limiting.
`
`RE500 – claim 41
`
`RE528 – claim 64
`
`The preamble is limiting.
`
`“A computer program product
`comprising . . . an intelligent
`cellular telephone capability
`with a secure web browser . . .
`configured to:”
`“A computer program product
`. . . configured to . . . open the
`first web browser process”
`
`“A computer program product
`. . . configured to . . . open a
`first web browser process”
`
`
`B. Disputed Claim Terms, Phrases or Clauses (P.R. 4-3(b)).
`
`Pursuant to Local Patent Rule 4-3(b), the chart attached as Exhibit A to this Joint
`
`Statement contains Plaintiffs’ proposed constructions and supporting evidence for each
`
`disputed claim term, phrase, or clause of the patents-in-suit, and the chart attached as Exhibit B
`
`to this Joint Statement contains Defendant’s proposed constructions and supporting evidence
`
`for each disputed claim term, phrase, or clause of patents-in-suit.
`
`C. Anticipated Length of Time for Claim Construction Hearing (P.R. 4-3(c)).
`
`The parties have met and conferred in good faith regarding the constructions of terms
`
`and have narrowed the issues for this Court to resolve. The Parties anticipate that the
`
`hearing will last for approximately 3 hours, 90 minutes per side.
`
`D. Witnesses and Experts (P.R. 4-3(d))
`
`The Parties do not intend to call any witnesses at the hearing. The Parties do not
`
`believe a technical expert is required to construe the disputed claim terms. Neither Party has
`
`identified any expert testimony as extrinsic evidence for claim construction purposes, but
`
`both parties have identified expert testimony on questions of indefiniteness which will be
`
`submitted by declaration and deposition transcript citations.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Google - Exhibit 1010, page 2
`
`

`
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 52 Filed 06/02/14 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 9232
`
`
`
`E. Other Issues (P.R. 4-3 (e)).
`
` Defendant’s Statement: Rule 4-3(e) requires the parties to raise “any other issues
`
`which might appropriately be taken up at a prehearing conference prior to the Claim
`
`Construction Hearing, and proposed dates, if not previously set, for any such prehearing
`
`conference.” With the Court’s permission, the parties have submitted letter briefs requesting to
`
`address the issue of improper subject matter recapture in the reissue claims. As Plaintiffs are
`
`aware, these letter briefs are currently pending before the Court. Defendant raises this issue
`
`because the letter briefs concern a dispositive issue that may impact the number of claims and
`
`claim terms to be addressed by the Court during claim construction. For this reason, it is in the
`
`interests of judicial efficiency to address the issue now.
`
`Defendant respectfully requests that the Court adopt the following briefing schedule for
`
`the recapture arguments in order address this dispositive issue at the claim construction hearing
`
`in August: Defendant’s Opening Brief due July 14, 2014, Plaintiffs’ Responsive Brief due July
`
`28, 2014 and Defendant’s Reply Brief due August 4, 2014.
`
`Plaintiffs’ Statement: The Court should not set summary judgment briefing on the
`
`issue of recapture. Defendant is improperly attempting to gain a second bite at early summary
`
`judgment on the issue of recapture. Defendant previously requested and received scheduled
`
`dates for when it could file a letter brief requesting leave to file early summary judgment on
`
`recapture, and if the Court granted leave, when it must file its motion for summary judgment on
`
`recapture. Dkt. #32.1 Defendant submitted its letter brief requesting leave to file summary
`
`judgment, and the Court did not grant leave before the February 14, 2014 deadline (and has since
`
`not granted leave, or ruled on the request). It is improper for Defendant to attempt to gain a
`
`1 The DCO states that “If leave is granted for Google to file a Motion for Summary Judgment of
`Invalidity Based on Improper Recapture under 35 U.S.C. § 251, Google to file motion” by
`February 14, 2014.
`
`
`
`Google - Exhibit 1010, page 3
`
`

`
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 52 Filed 06/02/14 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 9233
`
`second bite at the issue by requesting the Court revisit the issue and just lump it in with claim
`
`construction. It should also be noted that pursuant to PR 4-1, 4-2 and 4-3, the parties engaged in
`
`several meet and confers over the past month regarding claim construction. Not once was the
`
`issue of recapture ever raised, or that it should be included as part of claim construction, or what
`
`that schedule would even look like. On the very last day to file the P.R. 4-3 Joint Claim
`
`Construction Statement, at 4:00 p.m. PST in the afternoon, Defendant raised the issue of
`
`addressing recapture during claim construction for the first time by including it in its initial
`
`mark-up of the Joint Claim Construction Statement. Defendant’s last ditch effort to insert issues
`
`of recapture into claim construction is contrary to (1) the Court’s summary judgment letter
`
`briefing process, (2) the DCO, and (3) the good faith requirement of meet and confer over
`
`important issues such as requesting schedules for early summary judgment briefing, and
`
`therefore should be rejected by the Court.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /s/ Charles Ainsworth
`
`Charles Ainsworth
`State Bar No. 00783521
`Robert Christopher Bunt
`State Bar No. 00787165
`PARKER, BUNT & AINSWORTH, P.C.
`100 E. Ferguson, Suite 1114
`Tyler, TX 75702
`903/531-3535
`903/533-9687
`E-mail: charley@pbatyler.com
`E-mail: rcbunt@pbatyler.com
`
`
`
`Eric W. Benisek
`State Bar No. 209520
`Robert S. McArthur
`State Bar No. 204604
`VASQUEZ BENISEK & LINDGREN LLP
`3685 Mt. Diablo Boulevard, Suite 300
`Lafayette, CA 94549
`
`DATED:
`
`June 2, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Google - Exhibit 1010, page 4
`
`

`
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 52 Filed 06/02/14 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 9234
`
`925-627-4250
`925-403-0900-Fax
`Email: ebenisek@vbllaw.com
`Email: mcarthur@vbllaw.com
`
`
`
`William E. Davis, III
`Texas State Bar No. 24047416
`THE DAVIS FIRM, PC
`111 West Tyler Street
`Longview, Texas 75601
`Phone: (903) 230-9090
`Fax: (903) 230-9090
`Email: bdavis@bdavisfirm.com
`
`DATED:
`
`June 2, 2014
`
`Counsel for Plaintiffs Alfonso Cioffi, Melanie
`Rozman, Morgan Rozman and Megan Rozman
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /s/ Eugene Mar with permission
`
`Stephanie P. Skaff
`sskaff@fbm.com
`Eugene Y. Mar
`emar@fbm.com
`Marc Tarlock
`mtarlock@fbm.com
`Andrew P. Nguyen
`angyuyen@fbm.com
`FARELLA BRAUN + MARTEL LLP
`235 Montgomery Street, 17th Floor
`San Francisco, CA 94104
`Telephone: (415) 954-4400
`Facsimile: (415) 954-4480
`
`Michael E. Jones
`mikejones@potterminton.com
`Patrick Colbert Clutter , IV
`patrickclutter@potterminton.com
`POTTER MINTON, PC
`110 N College Ave., Ste. 500
`Tyler, TX 75702
`Telephone: (903) 597-8311
`Facsimile: (903) 593-0846
`
`Counsel for Defendant Google, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Google - Exhibit 1010, page 5
`
`

`
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 52 Filed 06/02/14 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 9235
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that on the 2nd day of June, 2014, the foregoing pleading was
`
`
`
`
`
`electronically filed with the Court. Pursuant to Local Rule CV-5, this constitutes service on the
`
`Eric W. Benisek
`State Bar No. 209520
`Robert S. McArthur
`State Bar No. 204604
`VASQUEZ BENISEK & LINDGREN LLP
`3685 Mt. Diablo Boulevard, Suite 300
`Lafayette, CA 94549
`925-627-4250
`925-403-0900-Fax
`Email: ebenisek@vbllaw.com
`Email: mcarthur@vbllaw.com
`
`Charles Ainsworth
`State Bar No. 00783521
`Robert Christopher Bunt
`State Bar No. 00787165
`PARKER, BUNT & AINSWORTH, P.C.
`100 E. Ferguson, Suite 1114
`Tyler, TX 75702
`903/531-3535
`903/533-9687
`E-mail: charley@pbatyler.com
`E-mail: rcbunt@pbatyler.com
`
`William E. Davis, III
`Texas State Bar No. 24047416
`THE DAVIS FIRM, PC
`111 West Tyler Street
`Longview, Texas 75601
`Phone: (903) 230-9090
`Fax: (903) 230-9090
`Email: bdavis@bdavisfirm.com
`
`/s/ Charles Ainsworth
`Charles Ainsworth
`
`4
`
`following counsel:
`
`Michael E. Jones
`mikejones@potterminton.com
`Patrick Colbert Clutter , IV
`patrickclutter@potterminton.com
`POTTER MINTON, PC
`110 N College Ave., Ste. 500
`Tyler, TX 75702
`Telephone: (903) 597-8311
`Facsimile: (903) 593-0846
`
`Stephanie P. Skaff
`sskaff@fbm.com
`Eugene Y. Mar
`emar@fbm.com
`Marc Tarlock
`mtarlock@fbm.com
`Andrew P. Nguyen
`angyuyen@fbm.com
`FARELLA BRAUN + MARTEL LLP
`235 Montgomery Street, 17th Floor
`San Francisco, CA 94104
`Telephone: (415) 954-4400
`Facsimile: (415) 954-4480
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Google - Exhibit 1010, page 6