` Case 3:18-cv-02838-K Document 175 Filed 04/12/19 Page 1 of 7 PageID 3343
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`DALLAS DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`FRACTUS, S.A.
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`
`v.
`
`ZTE CORPORATION, ZTE (USA),
`INC., ZTE (TX), INC.
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 3:18-CV-02838-K
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`JOINT NOTICE REGARDING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
`
`Pursuant to the Order Requiring Scheduling Conference and Report for Contents of
`
`Scheduling Order (Dkt. No. 160), the parties hereby submit this Joint Notice. The parties have
`
`agreed on a proposed schedule for the remainder of the case, with trial to begin November 4,
`
`2019.
`
`1) A brief statement of the claims
`
`a. This is a patent infringement case. The plaintiff Fractus is the owner of the seven
`
`Asserted Patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 7,394,432, 7,397,431, 8,941,541, 8,976,069,
`
`9,054,421, 9,240,632, and 9,362,617. The patents disclose antennas formed by geometric
`
`elements that are capable of operating at multiple frequency bands.
`
`b. Fractus alleges that a variety of ZTE mobile devices infringe one or more of the Asserted
`
`Patents.
`
`c. ZTE contends that it does not infringe the Asserted Patents, that all claims of the Asserted
`
`Patents are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious and some claims also are invalid
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 112.
`
`Fractus S.A.
`Ex. 2039
`ZTE (USA), Inc. v. Fractus S.A.; IPR2018-01461
`Page 1 of 7
`
`

`

`
` Case 3:18-cv-02838-K Document 175 Filed 04/12/19 Page 2 of 7 PageID 3344
`
`2) A proposed time limit to file motions for leave to join other parties
`
`a. The parties agree that the time to file motions for leave to join other parties has passed.
`
`3) A proposed time limit to amend pleadings
`
`a. The parties agree that the time limit to amend pleadings has passed.
`
`4) A proposed time limit to file various types of motions, including dispositive motions.
`
`a. The parties request that dispositive motions and motions to strike expert testimony
`
`(including Daubert motions) be due June 24, 2019, and that motions in limine be due on
`
`September 27, 2019.
`
`5) A proposed time limit for initial designation of experts
`
`a. The parties have already designated experts and served initial and rebuttal expert reports.
`
`6) A proposed time limit for responsive designation of experts
`
`a. The parties have already designated experts and served initial and rebuttal expert reports.
`
`7) A proposed time limit for objections to experts (i.e. Daubert and similar motions)
`
`a. The parties request that dispositive motions and motions to strike expert testimony
`
`(including Daubert motions) be due June 24, 2019.
`
`8) A proposed plan and schedule for discovery, a statement of the subjects on which
`discovery may be needed, a time limit to complete factual discovery and expert
`discovery, and a statement of whether discovery should be conducted in phases or
`limited to particular issues
`
`a. Fact discovery in this case is complete.
`
`b. Fractus notes that there is a pending motion to compel relating to the number of unit sales
`
`of ZTE devices. Dkt. No. 144. Fractus believes resolution of the pending motion will
`
`only impact the number of units sold, not the royalty rate applied to each infringing unit,
`
`and will not require significant additional fact discovery.
`
`- 2 -
`
`Fractus S.A.
`Ex. 2039
`ZTE (USA), Inc. v. Fractus S.A.; IPR2018-01461
`Page 2 of 7
`
`

`

`
` Case 3:18-cv-02838-K Document 175 Filed 04/12/19 Page 3 of 7 PageID 3345
`
`c. Each party has served three expert reports. On behalf of Fractus, Dr. Stuart Long served
`
`an infringement report and a rebuttal validity report. Mr. Robert Mills served a report on
`
`damages. On behalf of ZTE, Dr. Chris Bartone served an invalidity report and a rebuttal
`
`non-infringement report. Mr. Vincent Thomas served a rebuttal report on damages.
`
`d. The parties proposed that the deadline to complete expert discovery be May 31, 2019.
`
`Pursuant to the Discovery Order entered by the Eastern District of Texas (Dkt. No. 54),
`
`the parties request that expert depositions be limited to seven (7) hours per witness per
`
`expert report, but not to exceed twelve (12) hours total per expert witness.
`
`9) What changes should be made in the limitations on discovery imposed under the
`Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or by local rule, and what other limitations should
`be imposed
`
`a. Fact discovery in this case is complete.
`
`10) A proposed trial date, estimated number of days required for trial, and whether a
`jury has been properly demanded
`
`a. The parties propose a trial date of November 4, 2019, with five (5) days for trial. Trial by
`
`jury has been properly demanded in this case.
`
`11) A proposed date for further settlement negotiations
`
`a. The parties propose that additional settlement negotiations be conducted by September 1,
`
`2019.
`
`12) Objections to FRCP 26(a)(1) asserted at the Scheduling Conference
`
`a. There are no objections to FRCP 26(a)(1).
`
`13) Whether the parties will consent to trial before a U.S. Magistrate Judge
`
`a. The parties do not consent to trial before a U.S. Magistrate Judge.
`
`14) Whether the parties are considering mediation or arbitration to resolve this
`litigation and a statement of when alternative dispute resolution would be most
`effective, and if mediation is proposed, the name of any mediator the parties jointly
`recommend to mediate the case
`
`- 3 -
`
`Fractus S.A.
`Ex. 2039
`ZTE (USA), Inc. v. Fractus S.A.; IPR2018-01461
`Page 3 of 7
`
`

`

`
` Case 3:18-cv-02838-K Document 175 Filed 04/12/19 Page 4 of 7 PageID 3346
`
`a. The parties have previously engaged in mediation in an attempt to resolve the litigation
`
`before William Cornelius, who was assigned as mediator by the Eastern District of
`
`Texas.
`
`15) Any other proposals regarding scheduling and discovery that the parties believe will
`facilitate expeditious and orderly preparation for trial
`
`a. The parties propose the following schedule for the remainder of the case:
`
`Date
`
`Event
`
`November 4, 2019
`
`Jury Selection and Trial
`
`October 30, 2019
`
`Pretrial Conference
`
`October 16, 2019
`
`File Joint Pretrial Order, Joint Proposed Jury Instructions, Joint
`Proposed Verdict Form, Responses to Motions in Limine, Updated
`Exhibit Lists, Updated Witness Lists, and Updated Deposition
`Designations
`
`September 27, 2019
`
`File Motions in Limine; Serve Objections to Rebuttal Pretrial
`Disclosures
`
`September 13, 2019
`
`Serve Objections to Pretrial Disclosures; Serve Rebuttal Pretrial
`Disclosures
`
`September 6, 2019
`
`Serve Pretrial Disclosures (Witness List, Deposition Designations,
`and Exhibit List) by the Party with the Burden of Proof
`
`June 24, 2019
`
`May 31, 2019
`
`
`File Dispositive Motions and Motions to Strike Expert Testimony
`(including Daubert Motions)
`
`Deadline to Complete Expert Discovery
`
`16) Whether a conference with the Court is desired and the reasons for requesting a
`conference
`
`a. A conference with the Court is not necessary at this time.
`
`17) Any other matters relevant to the status and disposition of this case.
`
`a. None.
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`Fractus S.A.
`Ex. 2039
`ZTE (USA), Inc. v. Fractus S.A.; IPR2018-01461
`Page 4 of 7
`
`

`

`
` Case 3:18-cv-02838-K Document 175 Filed 04/12/19 Page 5 of 7 PageID 3347
`
`Dated: April 12, 2019
`
`
`
` Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`/s/ Ophelia Camina
`Max L. Tribble
`TX State Bar No. 20213950
`mtribble@susmangodfrey.com
`Ophelia F. Camina
`TX State Bar No. 03681500
`ocamina@susmangodfrey.com
`Justin A. Nelson
`TX State Bar No. 24034766
`jnelson@susmangodfrey.com
`SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
`1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100
`Houston, TX 77002-5096
`Telephone: (713) 651-9366
`Facsimile: (713) 654-6666
`
`Lora J. Krsulich
`CA State Bar No. 315399
`lkrsulich@susmangodfrey.com
`SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
`1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1400
`Los Angeles, CA 90067
`Telephone: (310) 789-3145
`Facsimile: (310) 789-3150
`
`Michael F. Heim
`TX State Bar No. 09380923
`mheim@hpcllp.com
`Leslie V. Payne
`TX State Bar No. 00784736
`lpayne@hpcllp.com
`Alden G. Harris
`TX State Bar No. 24083138
`aharris@hpcllp.com
`Blaine Larson
`TX State Bar No. 24083360
`blarson@hpcllp.com
`HEIM, PAYNE & CHORUSH, LLP
`1111 Bagby, Suite 2100
`Houston, TX 77002
`Telephone: (713) 221-2000
`Facsimile: (713) 221-2021
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR FRACTUS, S.A.
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`
`
`Fractus S.A.
`Ex. 2039
`ZTE (USA), Inc. v. Fractus S.A.; IPR2018-01461
`Page 5 of 7
`
`

`

`
` Case 3:18-cv-02838-K Document 175 Filed 04/12/19 Page 6 of 7 PageID 3348
`
`By: /s/ Jeffrey J. Catalano ___________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`James R. Sobieraj (IL Bar No. 6183779)
`jsobieraj@brinksgilson.com
`Andrea Shoffstall (IL Bar No. 6324647),
`pro hac vice
`ashoffstall@brinksgilson.com
`BRINKS GILSON & LIONE
`455 N. Cityfront Plaza Drive
`NBC Tower, Suite 3600
`Chicago, Illinois 60611-5599
`Phone: (312) 321-4200
`Fax: (312) 321-4299
`
`Jeffrey J. Catalano (IL Bar No. 6289197)
`jcatalano@freeborn.com
`FREEBORN & PETERS LLP
`311 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 3000
`Chicago, Illinois 60606
`Phone: (312) 360-6832
`Fax: (312) 360-6520
`
`Everett Upshaw
`State bar of Texas No. 24025690
`everttupshaw@upshawpllc.com
`Keana T. Taylor
`State Bar of Texas No. 24042013
`keanataylor@upshawpllc.com
`Erik Dykema
`New York Bar No. 4882460
`erikdykema@upshawpllc.com
`Craig Uhrich
`State Bar of Texas No. 24033284
`craiguhrich@upshawpllc.com
`UPSHAW PLLC
`1204 Gano Street
`Dallas, Texas
`Phone: (972) 920-8000
`Fax: (972) 920-8001
`
`Attorneys for Defendant ZTE (USA), Inc.
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`
`
`Fractus S.A.
`Ex. 2039
`ZTE (USA), Inc. v. Fractus S.A.; IPR2018-01461
`Page 6 of 7
`
`

`

`
` Case 3:18-cv-02838-K Document 175 Filed 04/12/19 Page 7 of 7 PageID 3349
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on April 12, 2019, all counsel of record who are deemed to have
`
`consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court’s
`
`CM/ECF system.
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Blaine Larson
`Blaine Larson
`
`- 7 -
`
`Fractus S.A.
`Ex. 2039
`ZTE (USA), Inc. v. Fractus S.A.; IPR2018-01461
`Page 7 of 7
`
`