UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN MOBILE ELECTRONIC
`DEVICES AND RADIO FREQUENCY
`AND PROCESSING COMPONENTS
`
`THEREOF (II)
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1093
`
`ORDER NO. 2:
`
`PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER AND NOTICE
`OF GROUND RULES
`
`(January 19, 2018)
`
`On January 2, 2018, the Commission instituted thislnvestigation pursuant to subsection
`
`(b) of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, to determine:
`
`_
`
`whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(l)(B) of section 337 in the
`importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the
`United States after importation of certain mobile electronic devices and radio
`frequency and processing components thereof by- reason of infringement of one or
`more of claims 1, 7, 8, 10, 11, 1?, and 18 of the ’356 patent; claim 4 of the ’336
`patent; claims 1, 5—8, 12, 16—18, and 21—22 of the ”674 patent; claims 1—4, 7—9,
`11, 17, 20—23, 31—33 and 36 of the ’002 patent; and claims 1—3, 10—12, 18, and
`22—24 of the ”633 patent;1 and whether an industry in the United States exists as
`required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337[.]
`-
`-'
`
`I 83 Fed. Reg. 834-35 (Jan. 8, 2018). Moreover, pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(b)(l), the
`
`presiding Administrative Law Judge shall:
`
`take evidence or other information and hear arguments from the parties or other
`interested persons with respect to the public interest in this investigation, as
`
`
`l The asserted utility patent numbers are: US. Patent No. 9,154,356 (“the ’356 patent”); US. Patent No.
`9,4?3,336 (“the ’336 patent”); US. Patent No. 8,063,624 (“the ’6?4 patent”); US. Patent No. 7,693,002
`(“the ’002 patent”); and US. Patent No. 9,552,633 (“the ’633 patent”). See, e.g., 83 Fed. Reg. 834 (Jan.
`8, 2018).
`
`l
`
`'
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019—00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)
`Qualcomm 2011, p.1
`
`

`

`appropriate, and provide the Commission with findings of fact and a
`recommended determination on this issue, which shall be limited to the statutory -
`public interest factors set forth in 19 U.S-C- 1337(d)(1), (f)(1), (g)(l)[.]
`
`Id. at 835.
`
`The Notice of Investigation (“NOI”) names as complainant: Qualcomm Inc. of San
`
`Diego, California (“Complainant” or “Qualcomm”). Id. at 835. The N01 names as respondent:
`
`Apple Inc. of Cupertino, California (“Respondent” or “Apple”).
`
`Id. The N01 also names the
`
`Office of Unfair Import Investigations (“Staff”) as a party. Id.
`
`Target Date ‘
`
`Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.51(a), a target date for completion of the Investigation
`
`in the above-captioned matter must be set. See 19 C-F.R. 210.51(a). Upon a review of the
`
`Complaint and the N01, and taking into account my commitments in other already instituted
`
`investigations, and staffing constraints, I have determined that a target date of sixteen-and-a-half
`
`(16.5) months is appropriate. The target date is therefore set for May 22, 2019. Based on this
`
`target date, the final initial determination on violation (“ID”) in this Investigation will be due no
`
`later than January 22, 2019. The proposed Procedural Schedule is set forth in Attachment A
`
`hereto. Ground Rules for this Investigation are set forth in Attachment B.
`
`Procedural Schedule
`
`The Parties shall file jointly by February 2, 2018 their own proposed procedural
`
`schedule that includes dates for each of the events in the attached proposed Procedural Schedule
`
`(as set forth in Ground Rule 1.13) that have not been identified.
`
`If the Parties wish to deviate from the proposed Procedural Schedule in Attachment A
`
`when proposing other dates, they should explain their rationale for the proposed changes in their
`
`submission. The Parties should have extraordinary reasons for proposing scheduling changes.
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:19)
`Qualcomm 2011, p.2
`
`

`

`However, certain dates such as the cvidentiary hearing dates, the target date and the date for
`
`submission for the initial determination on violation may not be changed at this time.
`
`When the Parties submit their proposed dates to fill in those dates lefl blank, or ifthe
`
`Parties wish to propose different dates for certain scheduled items, it would be helpfiJl for the
`
`Parties to use the chart in Attachment A, below, and to add a third column, or, altematively, to
`
`use color to identify/highlight the new or changed dates the Parties propose.
`
`Ground Rules and Changes
`
`The conduct of this Investigation before me shall be governed by the Commission Rules
`
`and Ground Rules attached hereto as Attachment B. The Parties should pay particular attention
`
`to the Ground'Rules governing this Investigation as they may differ from the Ground Rules
`
`issued by me in other investigations. For example, here are some recent changes of which
`
`Parties should be aware:
`
`(I)
`
`Exhibits attached to motions or memoranda, in addition to all post-hearing
`
`exhibits, must contain exhibit descriptions of the content in addition to an alpha or numerical
`
`identification.
`
`(2)
`
`All documents submitted as exhibits should be dated. If there are multiple
`
`iterations of the same documents, those multiple iterations should be dated. If, for example,
`
`screen shots of web sites are used, then the dates the ”screen shots were taken along with the
`
`httpszlladdress should be provided.
`
`(3)
`Moot issues (and issues that will not be pursued), such as withdrawn claims that
`will be dropped, contentions that will no longer be advocated, witnesses who will be dropped,
`
`documents that will not be used-that were previously relied upon, etc., should be identified at the
`
`earliest practicable time via an EDIS filing, with the Party responsible for the change doing the
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:20)
`Qualcomm 2011, p.3
`
`

`

`filing.
`
`(4)
`
`The parties must jointly create and maintain a single chart of substantive legal
`
`issues being litigated in the investigation. The chart shall be jointly filed as a separate docket
`
`entry simultaneously with the pre-hcaring and the post-hearing briefs. The parties’ pre-hearing
`
`and initial post-hearing briefs will follow the order of the issues set forth in the chart. The -
`
`leftmost column ofthe chart will list the issues being litigated, including all infringement and
`
`invaliditytheories and defenses. I The parties will create sub-sequent columns for each of their
`
`briefs, grouped by party (i.e., the chart accompanying the post-hearing reply briefs will include
`
`columns for Complainant(s)’s pre-hearing brief, initial post-hearing brief, and post-hearing reply
`
`brief, followed by columns for Respondent(s)’s pre-hearing brief, initial post«hearing brief, and
`post-hearing reply brief). The cells ofthe columns will contain page numbers of the particular
`
`sections of the briefs where those issues are addressed. If issues, contentions, arguments, or
`
`defenses have dropped out from the pre-hearing briefs, that should-be noted explicitly in the
`chart accompanying the initial post-hearing briefs. That same principle should carry through to
`
`the outline accompanying the post-hearing reply briefs.-
`
`I (5)
`
`Initial post-hearing briefs are now limited to issues on which each party bears the
`
`burden of proof.
`
`(6)
`
`l’ost—hearing reply briefs are now limited to the issues and evidence discussed in
`
`the initial post-hearing brief of each opposing party.
`
`(7)
`
`Parties should notify Chambers of any stipulations to which they have agreed
`
`whenever they occur during this Investigation.
`
`(8) - All motions are now limited to 25 pages, and all attachments to motions may not
`
`exceed a total of 100 pages without requesting leave for good cause.
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:21)
`QuaICOmm 2011, p.4
`
`

`

`(9)
`
`Unopposed motions and joint motions shall contain a proposed order. On the
`
`same day the motion is filed, a version of the motion including the proposed order in MS Word
`
`for Windows shall be submitted to the Administrative Law Judge’s Attorney Advisor via e-mail.
`
`(10)
`
`A party may file a stipulation to extend the deadline to respond to a subpoena
`
`only once as a matter of course. For any additional extensions, the party must file a motion for
`
`leave and show good cause. The same applies to third-party subpoenas.
`
`(11) With regard to deadlines in general, Parties may not jointly stipulate to extend
`
`deadlines without leave. Parties must file a motion and show good cause.
`
`(12)
`
`Any informal communication with the Administrative Law Judge’s Attorney
`
`Advisers via email or telephone shall not be referenced in any briefs, documents, or papers filed
`
`on EDIS. If a party references such a communication in a document filed on EDIS, the party
`
`will no longer be permitted to informally contact-the Attorney Advisors on any matter. All
`
`correspondence with Chambers will be conducted formally via EDIS.
`
`Discovegy
`
`Discovery should proceed expeditiously. Any discovery disputes should be brought to
`
`the Court’s attention as soon as practicable. Because discovery statements are generally vague
`
`early in the Investigation, they are no longer required. However, the Parties should file on EDIS
`
`by February 2, 2018 a list/notice of any proceedings in the United States Patent and Trademark
`
`Office (“US?TO”), including those before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”), in
`
`addition to the identification and the status of any concurrent federal or state litigation that may
`
`affect the issues in this Investigation.
`
`The Parties should make intensive good faith efforts to commence and respond to
`
`discovery promptly. This includes early and diligent applications for nonparty subpoenas, and
`
`S
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:22)
`Qualcomm 2011, p.5
`
`

`

`quick action to enforce said subpoenas if third-parties delay. Lack of diligence may affect a
`
`Party’s showing of good cause for motions to enforce discovery, particularly if such motions are
`
`adjacent to the close of fact discovery. The Parties should note that the deadlines in the proposed
`
`Procedural Schedule are considered to be the last day to complete a task.
`
`Motionszriefs lConfidentialiQ:
`
`All documents filed on EDIS, including motions, memoranda in support of motions,
`
`oppositions to motions, and reSponses to motions, must contain at the bottom of each page, the
`
`title of the filed document and the party filing it.
`
`Within seven (7) business days of the submission of a motion, a memorandum in support
`
`I of a motion, an opposition to a motion, and a response to a motion that a party contends contains
`
`Confidential Business Information (“CB1”), the party should submit a copy to Chambers (ALJ’s
`
`attorney) identifying the proposed CB1 redacted with red brackets.
`
`Patent Priority Dates, Prior Art and Technology
`
`The Parties are expected to identify patent priority dates and prior art, and to solidify their
`
`positions with respect to claim construction for the asserted patents early in the Investigation.
`
`Claim Construction
`
`The proposed Procedural Schedule in Attachment A identifies dates by which the Parties
`
`should meet and confer'to resolve claim tefnis,’ and'a date of May 11, 2018 by which
`
`Parties should submit ajoint claim construction chart. The Parties should submit proposals on or
`
`before May 18, 2018 with their comments as to whether a Markman hearing would be useful in
`
`resolving disputed claims. The Parties’ claim construction Markman briefs are also due on May
`
`18, 2018. A proposed timefrarne for a Markman hearing is offered that is almost three months
`
`before the evidentiary hearing, or sometime during the week of June 11-15, 2018 on a day and at
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:23)
`Qualcomm 2011, p.6
`
`

`

`a time to be determined. If the Parties wo’uld like to change that timeframe, they should provide
`
`a five (5) day date range before and at least a ten (10) day date range after.
`
`Ifa party contends that one or more disputed claim term(s) isfare indefinite, that party
`
`must provide an explanation of its reasoning in its Initial Claim Construction Brief, due
`
`May 18, 2018. Simply claiming a term is indefinite, or providing no rationale or a conclusory
`
`statement without support, will not be sufficient. The failure to provide a rationale may weigh
`
`against that proposal of claim term indefiniteness. Additionally, if a party proposes that one or
`
`more of the disputed claim terms should be construed to have its/'their plain and ordinary
`
`meaning(s),.that party must provide a proposed construction for each term so identified.
`
`Absent a showing ofgood cause, the Parties will be bound by their proposed
`
`constructionsfor disputed claim terms on the date thejaint submission ofdisputed claim terms
`
`is due.
`
`Pre-Hcaring and Evidentiag Hearing
`
`The evidentiary hearing is scheduled for September 17-21, 2018, if necessary, at a
`
`location to be announced closer to the hearing date. The pre—hearing conference and hearing will
`
`commence in the same location on September 17, 2018. The hearing days will start at 9:30 am.
`
`and conclude at 5:30 pm. each day, barring unforeseen circumstances (severely inclement
`
`weather, etc.). Additionally, at my discretion, I may hold one or more telephone conferences
`
`over a period of ten (10) days or so before the pre~hearing conference in order to resolve Motions
`
`in Limine and High Priority Objections.
`
`Direct testimony will be taken during the evidentiary hearing. Whether all of the
`
`testimony will be direct will be determined later. Basic background information about a witness
`
`or the issues may be considered as part of an acceptable witness statement.
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:24)
`Qualcomm 2011, p.7
`
`

`

`As the Investigation proceeds closer to the evidentiary hearing dates, the Parties will be
`
`asked if they need additional days or fewer days for the evidentiary hearing. While the Parties
`
`are encouraged to reduce the number of evidentiary hearing days as they winnow down issues
`
`and disputes, exigencies do occur. If the Parties need additional days, we may adjust the
`
`schedule, most likely to include days the week before the dates now scheduled, if possible.
`
`Settlement and Mediation
`
`The proposed Procedural Schedule includes a date for one settlement meeting and a one-
`
`day mediation session (none of which will include me) at a time, date, and location of the
`
`Parties” choosing for the good faith exploration of settlement, by persons who have significant or
`
`' requisite settlement authority, over the issues in the case. Unless the Parties obtain my
`
`permission, for good cause shown, the settlement meeting should not occur by video-
`
`conferencing or by teleconferencing. The Commission Investigative Staff, designated as a party
`
`to the Investigation (see 82 FR. at 18311), may be present at the settlement meeting to facilitate,
`
`but not mediate, the process without my prior approval. The mediation has been scheduled close
`
`to the cvidentiary hearing. The Parties should include dates in their pmposed schedule for filing
`
`the joint settlement conference report}
`
`Conclusion
`
`To recapitulate: because these are fast-paced proceedings, the Parties are expected to
`
`exert diligence and file motions earlier than the stated deadline, such as motions to compel
`
`discovery or to enforce subpoenas, Motions for Summary Determination, and even Motions in
`
`Limine.
`
`
`
`3 Scttlement conference reports, at a minimum, should state what meeting(5) took place, who attended,
`and what result, if any, was obtained in each meeting. See Certain Dynamic Random Access Memory and
`NAND Flash Memory Devices and Products Containing Some, lnv. No. 337-TA-803, Order No. 16
`(U.S.I.T.C. Nov. 21, 2011).
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:25)
`Qualcomm 2011, p.8
`
`

`

`The Parties should not tactically seek to withhold or delay motions, as every party is
`
`expected to proceed expeditiously. Commission Rule 210.2.
`
`Please note that in the event a party needs to contact Chambers, they should contact Mr.
`
`Michael Buckler, michael.buckler@usitc-gov.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`9
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:26)
`Qualcomm 2011, p.9
`
`

`

`ATTACHMENT A
`
`Inv'. No. 337-TA-1093
`
`PROPOSED PROCEDURAL SCHEDULE & DATES
`
`—“
`
`Parties File a Proposed Procedural Schedule and
`Identify USPTOKPTO proceedings as well as state and
`federal litigation that is relevant to this Investigation
`
`Deadline for Propounding First Set of Interrogatories
`
`February 2, 2018
`
`February 14, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`Deadline for Propounding First Request for Production
`of Documents
`
`February 14, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
` Deadline for Respondent’s Objections and Responses
`
`
`to Complainant's First Set of Interrogatories and
`Request for Production
`
`Deadline for Initial Contention Interrogatories _
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Deadline for Complainant’s Objections and Responses
`to Respondent’s First Set of Interrogatories and -
`Request for Production
`
`Deadline for Initial Contentiou Deadline Interrogatory
`
`Responses
`
`File Identification of Expert Witnesses, Including Their March 2, 2018
`Expertise and Curriculum Vitae
`.
`
`.
`Complainants File Notice of Patent Priority
`Datesmates of Conception and Curriculum Vitae
`
`.
`
`.
`
`..
`
`_ March 9, 2018
`
`Parties Exchange List of Patent Claim Terms for
`Construction
`1
`
`March 23, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`_
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:17)
`Qualcomm 2011, p.10
`
`
`
`_
`l
`
`

`

`Their Proposed Construction of Disputed Claim Terms—
`
`
`
`Parties Meet and Confer (including Staff) to Attempt to May 2, 2018
`Limit Claim Terms and Claim Term Disputes
`
`File Joint Claim Construction Chart
`
`- May 11, 2018
`
`Parties File a Joint List Showing Each Party’s Proposed May 18, 2018
`
`Construction of Disputed Claim Terms, with Initial
`Briefs by All Parties Explaining Their Initial Claim
`Constructions
`
`
`
`Deadline to File Markmcm Hearing Proposals
`
`May 18, 2018
`
`Deadline for Disclosure of Domestic Industry
`Contentions
`
`May 25, 2018
`
`Last Day to File Motions to Compel Discovery
`
`May 29, 2018
`
`Fact Discovery Cutoff and Completion
`
`May 29, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Technology Stipulation Deadline
`
`Markman Hearing (if Ordered)
`
`(Parties should provide thumb drive or CD ROMS of
`tutorials if included in Markman Hearing)
`
`File Tentative List of Witnesses a Party Will Call to
`Testify at the Evidentiary Hearing, with an
`Identification of Each Witness’s Relationship to the
`
`Party
`
`Exchange of Initial Expert Reports (Identify __ __
`Testsl'Surveystata)
`
`_
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`June 1, 2018
`
`Week ofJune 11-15,
`2018
`
`June 8, 2018
`
`June 22, 2018' _
`
`Exchange of Rebuttal Expert Reports
`
`Expert Discovery Cutoff and Completion
`
`Last Day to File Summary Determination Motions
`
`
`I This date can be later ifthe Parties do not need extra hearing dates. Given that Commission Rule 210.18
`requires at least 60 days between summary determination motions and the evidentiary hearing, the
`proposed date may be moved to a later date if the proposed hearing dates do not change.
`
`..
`ll
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:18)
`Qualcomm 2011, p.11
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Submission of Statements Regarding the Use of
`Witness Statements in lieu of Live Direct TestimOny,
`and Statements Regarding Whether Any Party Intends
`
`
`
`
`toOfferExpertReportsintoEvidence -
`
`
`Parties Exchange Exhibit Lists
`
`June 29, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Submit and Serve Direct Exhibits (Including Witness
`Statements, if ApprOpriate), with Physical and
`Demonstrative Exhibits Available — Complainants and
`Respondents
`
`Submit and Serve Direct Exhibits (Including Witness
`Statements), with thsical and Demonstrative Exhibits
`
`File Pre-hearing Statements and Briefs (Briefs should
`contain no more than 100 pages of text, each side,
`unless there is no identity of interests, or different
`interests. To be discussed)
`
`Staff files Pre-hearing Statement and Brief (No more
`than 100 pages of text)
`
`July 13, 2018
`
`'
`
`July 20, 2018
`
`File Requests for Receipt of Evrdence Without a
`Witness
`
`Attendance at One-day Mediation Session2
`
`By August 10, 2018
`
`Submission of Mediation Report
`
`'
`
`(Within 7 days of
`Mediation)
`
`
`
`
`.-
`FileObjections.toDirectExhibits.(includingWitness-
`
` Submit and Serve Rebuttal Exhibits (including Witness
`
`
`
`Statements)
`
`
`
`Statements), with Rebuttal Physical and Demonstrative
`Exhibits Available
`
`Last day to file Motions in Limine
`
`August 10, 2018
`
`File Responses to Objections to Direct Exhibits _
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2 For any questions regarding the mediation program, the parties should refer to the Revised Users’
`Manual for Commission Mediation Program, available at httpu’fwwwnsitcgov.
`
`iii
`
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:19)
`Qualco'mm 2011, p.12
`
`

`

`
` (Including Witness statements)
`
`File Objectlons to Rebuttal Exhibits (Including Witness
`Statements)
`
`File H1gh Prionty 0b] eetions
`
`File Response to Objections to Rebuttal EXhlbltS
`(including Witness statements)
`
`File Responses to Motions in Liming
`
`File Responses to ngh Priority Objections
`
`.
`.
`1
`.
`.
`.
`Submission of Declarations Justifymg Confdentiahty
`of Exhlbits
`
`
`
`
`
`Propose)
`
`
`
`Pie-Hearing Conference
`
`
`
` Evidentiary Hearing (Starting with Tutorials, as Parties
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`August 10, 2018
`
`August 17, 2018
`
`August 1?, 2018
`
`September 17, 2018
`(location TBA)
`
`9:30 a.m., September
`17-21, 2018 (location
`TBA)
`
`business days afler
`hearing
`
`October 5, 2018
`
`October S, 2018
`
` Last day to submit Final Exhibits, by Appointment. All No' more than four (4)
`
`Exhibits Should be Properly Labeled. (Follow the
`Ground Rules)
`
`'
`
`File Initial Post-Hearing Briefs an_d Final Exhibit Lists
`(Briefs should contain no more than 75 pages of text)
`
`
`
`Submit Final JOINT Direct and Rebuttal Exhibits
`
`(CDROM or Flash Drive)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`File Reply Post-Hearing Briefs on Issues on Which The October 12, 2018
`Party Bears the Burden of Proof (Briefs should contain
`no more than 50 pages of text):
`
`
`
`
`
`Final ID due
`
`
`
`January 22, 2019
`
`
`
`3 Any party may weigh in on matters on which they do not have the burden of proof. Staff is expected to
`(cid:42)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:26)
`IPR2019-00129
`file a Post-Hearing Reply Brief, but may choose which issues to address.
`(cid:50)(cid:86)(cid:66)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:78)(cid:78)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:81)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:20)
`Qualcomm 2011, p.13
`
`iv
`
`