`
`Hearing on Motion to Stay
`
`Delaware Display Group LLC et al. v. LG Electronics Inc. et a/.,
`
`C.A. No. 13-2109-RGA
`
`October 19, 2015
`
`|DT_000020
`
`IDT_000020
`
`
`
`Ideal Candidate For a Stay
`
`°
`
`Simplification — |PRs will undoubtedly narrow the case
`
`—
`
`asserted patents and claims w_iH be canceled
`
`-
`
`Timing is ideal
`
`-
`
`—
`
`—
`
`—
`
`No claim construction hearing yet
`
`Trial is a year away
`
`Fact and expert discovery still to be conducted
`
`no stay will result in major confusion at very difficult times
`
`°
`
`No prejudice if case is stayed
`
`2
`
`MAYER'BROWN
`
`|DT_000021
`
`IDT_000021
`
`
`
`Factors Supporting a Motion to Stay
`
`
`
`A Stay Will Not Unduly
`Prejudice the Plaintiffs
`
`Timing Considerations Favor a
`
`Stay
`
`The Status of |PRs Favors a Stay
`
`The Relationship Among the
`
`Parties Favors a Stay
`
`A Stay will Simplify the
`Issues for Trial
`
`Procedural Posture is Ideal
`
`for a Stay
`
`3
`
`MAYER°BROWN
`
`|DT_000022
`
`IDT_000022
`
`
`
`N0 Prejudice - Plaintiffs’ Claims of Prejudice
`
`°
`
`”indefinite stay”
`
`—
`
`9 months is not indefinite
`
`° Defendants took too long to file IPRS
`
`—
`
`—
`
`Initial round filed before initial disclosures
`
`Second round filed around invalidity contentions
`
`° Not enough |PRs are instituted
`
`—
`
`—
`
`—
`
`6 lPRs instituted against 4 (of 7) patents
`
`5 pending petitions, implicating the other 2 (of 7) patents
`
`Only 1 patent not covered by instituted or pending IPRs
`
`4
`
`MAYER*BROWN
`
`|DT_000023
`
`IDT_000023
`
`
`
`NO Prejudice - Plaintiffs’ Claims of Prejudice
`
`"-
`|
`N Instituted/dropped Dropped
`B 2 dropped
`2 dropped
`”'°”"“
`2 dropped
`
`IPR (Pretech)
`
`Dropped
`
`2 dropped
`
`2 dropped
`
`Dropped
`
`Dropped
`
`Dropped
`
`
`
`5
`
`MAYER°BROWN
`
`|DT_000024
`
`
`
`
`Denied
`
`'
`
`'
`
`IDT_000024
`
`
`
`NO Prejudice — Plaintiffs’ Claims of Prejudice
`
`°
`
`"P|aintiffs’ ability to license the patents” is impacted
`
`—
`
`—
`
`—
`
`All but one patents expired
`
`All but remaining defendants already resolved their disputes
`
`No current licensing program for displays
`
`° No Preiudice to Plaintiffs
`
`6
`
`MAYER°BROWN
`
`|DT_000025
`
`IDT_000025
`
`
`
`Factors Supporting a Motion to Stay
`
`
`
`Timing Considerations Favor a
`Stay
`
`The Status of lPRs Favors a Stay
`
`The Relationship Among the
`Parties Favors a Stay
`
`‘/
`
`/
`
`‘/
`
`/
`
`A Stay Will Not Unduly
`Prejudice the Plaintiffs
`
`A Stay will Simplify the
`Issues for Trial
`
`Procedural Posture is Ideal
`
`for a Stay
`
`7
`
`MAYER°BROWN
`
`|DT_000026
`
`IDT_000026
`
`
`
`A Stay Will Simplify the Case
`
`°
`
`lPRs are already working
`
`—
`
`2 patents dropped, with claims canceled
`
`° Virtual certainty of additional canceled claims
`
`— About half of challenged claims are canceled
`
`— About 86% of ”e|ectrica|/computer” claims are canceled in
`final written decisions
`
`-
`
`Case is unmanageable right now — 53,000 assertions
`
`8
`
`MAYER*BROWN
`
`|DT_000027
`
`IDT_000027
`
`
`
`No Stay Will Complicate the Case
`
`°
`
`Institutions and Final Written Decisions due:
`
`—
`
`—
`
`—
`
`just as expert discovery is starting (1 FWD in January; 2 IDs in
`February);
`
`just as expert discovery is wrapping up (3 IDs in March; 1 FWD in
`March); and
`
`just as we are past summaryjudgment/daubert and ramping up
`for trial (2 FWDs in July)
`
`9
`
`MAYER°BROWN
`
`|DT_000028
`
`IDT_000028
`
`
`
`Stay Saves Resources
`
`°Pe“"'g
`Expert Reports
`Feb. 1, 2016 Rebuttal
`
`Reports
`
`Feb. 29, 2016
`
`Reply
`
`March 21, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`Fact Djssovery
`
`Oct. 24, 2016
`
`Expert
`
`Discovery Closes
`
`April 22, 2016
`Dispositive
`Motions
`
`June 3, 2016
`
`Trial
`
`
`
`'973, ‘660 FWD
`
`July 2016
`
`'816, '974, 370 ID
`
`Mar. 22, 2016
`
`'177 FWD
`
`Feb. 2, 2016
`
`15‘ 370 FWD
`
`1o
`
`Ja“13r2°15
`
`MAYER°BROWN
`
`|DT_000029
`
`IDT_000029
`
`
`
`Factors Supporting a Motion to Stay
`
`
`
`A Stay Will Not Unduly
`Prejudice the Plaintiffs
`
`A Stay will Simplify the
`Issues for Trial
`
`Procedural Posture is Ideal
`
`for a Stay
`
`Timing Considerations Favor a
`
`Stay
`
`The Status of lPRs Favors a Stay
`
`The Relationship Among the
`
`Parties Favors a Stay
`
`\
`
`\\'\\
`
`11
`
`MAYER°BROWN
`
`|DT_000030
`
`IDT_000030
`
`
`
`Procedural Posture — Ideal Time for a Stay
`
`° Trial date more than a year from today.
`
`- No claim construction hearing yet
`
`° Expert discovery not even begun
`
`- Fact discovery not complete
`
`12
`
`MAYER*BROWN
`
`|DT_000031
`
`IDT_000031
`
`
`
`16+ Depositions To Be Scheduled
`
`1. Greg Coghlan (10/7/15)
`2. Bob Ezell (10/7/15)
`3. Tim McCo||um (10/8/15)
`
`Jeffrey Parker
`1.
`2. Funitomo Hide
`3. David Pristash
`
`4. Acacia Research Corporation/Acacia Research
`
`S°9°.“9‘S-"'
`
`Group LLC
`
`Jaime Siegel
`
`Jonathan Taub,
`
`Rambus Inc./Rambus Delaware LLC
`
`LG Display- 30(b)(6)
`LG Electronics - 30(b)(6)
`10. P|aintiffs- 30(b)(6)
`
`11. 3M
`
`12. Lumitex, Inc.
`
`13. Alfredo Lezama
`
`14. Maurice Daniel
`
`15. Stefan Tamme
`
`16. Michael Nguyen
`
`13
`
`MAYER'BROWN
`
`|DT_000032
`
`IDT_000032
`
`
`
`13+ Outstanding Document Subpoenas
`
`.‘°9°.\'.°‘9‘P'S*’!\’!‘
`
`Sprint Corporation
`
`Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., lnc.
`
`Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC
`
`Sony Corporation of America
`
`Lumitex, Inc.
`
`Alfredo Lezama
`
`Maurice Daniel
`
`Stefan Tamme
`
`Michael Nguyen
`
`|—\ .0 Apple
`
`I—‘ 5'‘
`
`3M
`
`l—‘ l‘-’ Hewlett-Packa rd/Compaq
`
`|—\ 5*’
`
`IBM
`
`14
`
`MAYER‘BROWN
`
`|DT_000033
`
`IDT_000033
`
`
`
`Procedural Posture — Ideal Time for a Stay
`
`° Major Potential Complications
`
`— Disputes over scope of case
`
`— Disputes over claim charts
`
`— Re-do of claim construction
`
`— Re-do of expert reports
`
`— Re-do of expert depositions
`
`— Re-do summaryjudgment
`
`— Re-frame entire case in months before trial
`
`15
`
`MAYER'BROWN
`
`|DT_000034
`
`IDT_000034
`
`
`
`Stay Saves Resources
`
`°Pe"i"8
`
`Expert Reports
`
`15+ depositions
`
`9+ document subpoena
`
`Written discovery responses
`
`HT
`Markman
`Fact
`
`Discovery
`Hearing
`Oct. 27, 2015 Closes
`
`Fact Discovery
`
`'973, '660 FWD
`
`
`
`July 2016
`
`’816, '974, ’370 ID
`
` Mar. 22, 2016
`
`'177 FWD
`
`Feb. 2, 2016
`
`1st 370 FWD
`
`1.;
`
`Ja"13r-’-°15
`
`MAYER-BROWN
`
`|DT_000035
`
`
`
`Reports
`
`Feb. 29, 2016
`
`Reply
`
`March 21, 2016
`
`Expert
`
`Discovery Closes
`Apr" 22: 2015
`Dispositive
`Motions
`
`June 3, 2016
`
`Trial
`
`Oct. 24, 2016
`
`IDT_000035
`
`
`
`Factors Supporting a Motion to Stay
`
`
`
`A Stay Will Not Unduly
`Prejudice the Plaintiffs
`
`A Stay will Simplify the
`
`Issues for Trial
`
`Procedural Posture is Ideal
`for a Stay
`
`Timing Considerations Favor a
`Stay
`
`The Status of |PRs Favors a Stay
`
`The Relationship Among the
`Parties Favors a Stay
`
`‘/
`
`‘/
`
`‘/
`
`¢
`
`‘/
`
`‘/
`
`17
`
`MAYER°BROWN
`
`|DT_000036
`
`IDT_000036
`
`
`
`Conclusion
`
`- no prejudice to Plaintiffs if the case is stayed
`
`- the case would be greatly simplified by letting the
`|PRs run their course
`
`- the case would be greatly complicated if not stayed
`
`° procedurally, this is the ideal time to stay the case
`
`18
`
`MAYER‘BROWN
`
`|DT_000037
`
`IDT_000037
`
`
`
`° Following slide if needed
`
`19
`
`MAYER‘BROWN
`
`|DT_000038
`
`IDT_000038
`
`
`
`Only Minor Differences Between The First Instituted
`‘370 IPR Claims and the Asserted Claims
`
`Asserted Claims
`
`15‘ ‘370 IPR Claims
`
`1/13. both the front and 15/27. at least one of the
`back sides havinga pattern sides having a pattern of
`of
`light
`extracting light extracting deformities
`deformities
`that
`are that
`are
`projections
`or
`projections or depressions depressions on or in the at
`on or in the sides to cause least one side to cause light
`light
`to be emitted from to be emitted from the
`
`a panel member
`in
`the panel member
`predetermined
`output predetermined
`distribution,
`distribution,
`
`a
`in
`output
`
`20
`
`MAYER°BROWN
`
`|DT_000039
`
`IDT_000039