Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 1464
`
`Illumina Ex. 1154
`Illumina v. Columbia
`IPR2020-01177
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 2 of 20 PagelD #: 1465
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 2 of 20 PageID #: 1465
`
`(a)
`
`Each claim of each asserted patent that is allegedly infringed by
`
`Defendant, including for each claim the applicable statutory subsections of 35 U.S.C.
`
`§271 asserted;
`
`(b)
`
`Separately for each asserted claim, each accused apparatus, product,
`
`device, process, method, act, or other instrumentality (“Accused lnstrumentality”) of
`
`Defendant of which Plaintiffs are aware. This identification shall be as specific as
`
`possible. Each product, device, and apparatus shall be identified by name or model
`
`number, if known. Each method or process shall be identified by name, if known, or by
`
`any product, device, or apparatus which, when used, allegedly results in the practice of
`
`the claimed method or process;
`
`(0)
`
`A chart identifying specifically where and how each limitation of each
`
`asserted claim is found within each Accused Instrumentality, including for each
`
`limitation that Plaintiffs contend is governed by 35 U.S.C. § 112(0, the identity of the
`
`structure(s), act(s), or material(s) in the Accused lnstrumentality that performs the
`
`claimed function;
`
`(d)
`
`For each claim alleged to have been indirectly infringed, an identification
`
`of any direct infringement and a description of the acts of the alleged indirect infringer
`
`that contribute to or are inducing that direct infringement. Insofar as alleged direct
`
`infringement is based onjoint acts of multiple parties, the role of Defendant in the direct
`
`infringement must be described;
`
`(e)
`
`Whether each limitation of each asserted claim is alleged to be present
`
`literally or under the doctrine of equivalents in the Accused lnstrumentality;
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 3 of 20 PageID #: 1466
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 3 of 20 PageID #: 1466
`
`(i)
`
`For any patent that claims priority to an earlier application, the priority
`
`date to which each asserted claim is alleged to be entitled;
`
`(g)
`
`[f Plaintiffs wish to preserve the right to rely, for any purpose, on the
`
`assertion that their own or their licensee’s apparatus, product, device, process, method,
`
`act, or other instrumentality practices the claimed invention, Plaintiffs shall identify,
`
`separately for each asserted claim, each such apparatus, product, device, process, method,
`
`act, or other instrumentality that incorporates or reflects that particular claim;
`
`(h)
`
`The timing of the point of first infringement, the start of claimed damages,
`
`and the end of claimed damages; and
`
`(i)
`
`if Plaintiffs allege willful infringement, the basis for such allegation.
`
`4.
`
`Document Production Accompanying Disclosure of Asserted Claims and
`
`Infringement Contentions. With the “Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement
`
`Contentions,” Plaintiffs shall produce to Defendant or make available for inspection and
`
`copying:
`
`(a)
`
`Documents (e.g., contracts, purchase orders, invoices, advertisements,
`
`marketing materials, offer letters, beta site testing agreements, and third party orjoint
`
`development agreements) sufficient to evidence each discussion with, disclosure to, or
`
`other manner of providing to a third party, or sale of or offer to sell, or any public use of,
`
`the claimed invention prior to the date of application for the asserted patent(s);
`
`(b)
`
`All documents evidencing the conception, reduction to practice, design,
`
`and development of each claimed invention, which were created on or before the date of
`
`application for the asserted patent(s) or the priority date identified pursuant to paragraph
`
`3(f) of this Order, whichever is earlier;
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 4 of 20 PagelD #: 1467
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 4 of 20 PageID #: 1467
`
`(c)
`
`A copy of the file history for each asserted patent;
`
`(d)
`
`All documents evidencing ownership of the patent rights by Plaintiffs;
`
`(e)
`
`If Plaintiffs identify instrumentalities pursuant to paragraph 3(g) of this
`
`Order, documents sufficient to show the operation of any aspects or elements of such
`
`instrumentalities Plaintiffs rely upon as embodying any asserted claims;
`
`(f)
`
`All agreements, including licenses, transferring an interest in any asserted
`
`patent;
`
`(g)
`
`All agreements that Plaintiffs contend are comparable to a license that
`
`would result from a hypothetical reasonable royalty negotiation;
`
`(h)
`
`All agreements that otherwise may be used to support Plaintiffs’ damages
`
`case;
`
`(i)
`
`If Plaintiffs identify instrumentalities pursuant to paragraph 3(g) of this
`
`Order, documents sufficient to show marking of such embodying accused
`
`instrumentalities; and if Plaintiffs want to preserve the right to recover lost profits based
`
`on such products, the sales, revenues, costs, and profits of such embodying accused
`
`instrumentalities; and
`
`(i)
`
`All documents comprising or reflecting a F/RAND commitment or
`
`agreement with respect to the asserted patent(s).
`
`Plaintiffs shall separately identify by production number the documents that correspond to each
`
`category set forth in this paragraph. Plaintiffs’ production of a document as required by this
`
`paragraph shall not constitute an admission that such document evidences or is prior art under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102.
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 5 of 20 PagelD #: 1468
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 5 of 20 PageID #: 1468
`
`5.
`
`Invalidity Contentions. No later than February 21, 2020, Defendant shall serve
`
`on Plaintiffs its “Invalidity Contentions” which shall contain the following information:
`
`(a)
`
`The identity of each item of prior art that Defendant alleges anticipates
`
`each asserted claim or renders the claim obvious. Each prior art patent shall be identified
`
`by its number, country of origin, and date of issue. Each prior art publication shall be
`
`identified by its title, date of publication, and, where feasible, author and publisher. Each
`
`alleged sale or public use shall be identified by specifying the item offered for sale or
`
`publicly used or known, the date the offer or use took place or the information became
`
`known, and the identity of the person or entity which made the use or which made and
`
`received the offer, or the person or entity which made the information known or to whom
`
`it was made known. For pre-AIA claims, prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(0 shall be
`
`identified by providing the name of the person(s) from whom and the circumstances
`
`under which the invention or any part of it was derived. For pre-AIA claims, prior art
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 102(g) shall be identified by providing the identities of the person(s) or
`
`entities involved in and the circumstances surrounding the making of the invention before
`
`the patent applicant(s);
`
`(b)
`
`Whether each item of prior art anticipates each asserted claim or renders it
`
`obvious. If obviousness is alleged, an explanation of why the prior art renders the
`
`asserted claim obvious, including an identification of any combinations of prior art
`
`showing obviousness;
`
`(c)
`
`A chart identifying specifically where and how in each alleged item of prior
`
`art each limitation of each asserted claim is found, including for each limitation that
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 6 of 20 PagelD #: 1469
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 6 of 20 PageID #: 1469
`
`Defendant contends is governed by 35 U.S.C. § 1 12(f), the identity of the structure(s),
`
`act(s), or material(s) in each item of prior art that performs the claimed function; and
`
`(d)
`
`Any grounds of invalidity based on 35 U.S.C. § 10 l , indefiniteness under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 112(b), or lack of enablement or insufficient written description under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 1 12(a) of any of the asserted claims.
`
`6.
`
`Document Production Accompanying Invalidity Contentions. With the “Invalidity
`
`Contentions,” Defendant shall produce or make available for inspection and copying:
`
`(a)
`
`Source code, specifications, schematics, flow charts, artwork, formulas, or
`
`other documentation sufficient to show the operation of any aspects or elements of an
`
`Accused lnstrumentality identified by Plaintiffs in their chart produced pursuant to
`
`paragraph 3(0) of this Order;
`
`(b)
`
`A copy or sample of the prior art identified pursuant to paragraph 5(a) that
`
`does not appear in the file history of the patent(s) at issue. To the extent any such item is
`
`not in English, an English translation of the portion(s) relied upon shall be produced;
`
`(c)
`
`All agreements that Defendant contends are comparable to a license that
`
`would result from a hypothetical reasonable royalty negotiation;
`
`(d)
`
`Documents sufficient to show the sales, revenue, cost, and profits for
`
`Accused Instrumentalities identified pursuant to paragraph 3(b) of this Order for any
`
`period of alleged infringement; and
`
`(e)
`
`All agreements that may be used to support the damages case of
`
`Defendant.
`
`Defendant shall separately identify by production number the documents that correspond to each
`
`category set forth in this paragraph.
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 7 of 20 PageID #: 1470
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 7 of 20 PageID #: 1470
`
`7.
`
`Amendment to Contentions. Amendment of the Infringement Contentions or the
`
`Invalidity Contentions may be made only by order of the Court upon a timely showing of good
`
`cause. Non-exhaustive examples of circumstances that may, absent undue prejudice to the non-
`
`moving party, support a finding of good cause include (a) recent discovery of material prior art
`
`despite earlier diligent search and (b) recent discovery of nonpublic information about the
`
`Accused Instrumentality which was not discovered, despite diligent efforts, before the service of
`
`the Infringement Contentions. The duty to supplement discovery responses does not excuse the
`
`need to obtain leave of the Court to amend contentions.
`
`8.
`
`Joinder of Other Parties and Amendment of Pleadings. All motions tojoin other
`
`parties, and to amend or supplement the pleadings, shall be filed on or before May 29, 2020.
`
`9.
`
`Discovery.
`
`(a)
`
`Discovery Cut Off. All fact discovery in this case shall be initiated so that
`
`it will be completed on or before February 22, 2021.
`
`(b)
`
`Document Production. Document production shall be completed on or
`
`before October 16, 2020.
`
`(c)
`
`Requests for Admission. A maximum of 30 requests for admission are
`
`permitted for each side. The parties shall meet and confer concerning authenticity of
`
`documents without the need for formal requests for admission.
`
`(d)
`
`Interrogatories. A maximum of 25 interrogatories, including contention
`
`interrogatories, are permitted for each side.
`
`(e)
`
`Depositions.
`
`(i)
`
`Limitation on Hours for Deposition Discoveg. Each side is limited
`
`to a total of 80 hours of taking testimony by deposition upon oral examination.
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 8 of 20 PagelD #: 1471
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 8 of 20 PageID #: 1471
`
`(ii)
`
`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 or by agreement of the parties. 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.
`
`lO.
`
`Pinpoint Citations. Pinpoint citations are required in all briefing, letters, and
`
`concise statements of facts. The Court will ignore any assertions of controverted facts and
`
`controverted legal principles not supported by a pinpoint citation to, as applicable: the record, an
`
`attachment or exhibit, and/or case law or appropriate legal authority. See United States v. Dunkel,
`
`927 F.2d 955, 956 (“Judges are not like pigs, hunting for truffles buried in briefs”).
`
`1 1.
`
`Application to Court for Protective Order. Should counsel find it will be
`
`necessary to apply to the Court for a protective order specifying terms and conditions for the
`
`disclosure of confidential information, counsel should confer and attempt to reach an agreement
`
`on a proposed form of order and submit it to the Court by January 10, 2020.
`
`Any proposed protective order must include the following paragraph:
`
`Other Proceedings. By entering this Order and limiting the
`disclosure of information in this case, the Court does not intend to
`preclude another court from finding that information may be
`relevant and subject to disclosure in another case. Any person or
`party subject to this Order who becomes subject to a motion to
`disclose another party’s information designated as confidential
`pursuant to this Order shall promptly notify that party of the
`motion so that the party may have an opportunity to appear and be
`heard on whether that information should be disclosed.
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 9 of 20 PagelD #: 1472
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 9 of 20 PageID #: 1472
`
`12.
`
`Disputes Relating to Discovery Matters and Protective Orders. Should counsel
`
`find they are unable to resolve a dispute relating to a discovery matter or protective order, the
`
`parties shall contact the Court’s Case Manager to schedule an in-person conference/argument.
`
`(a)
`
`Unless otherwise ordered, by no later than 72 hours prior to the
`
`conference/argument, the party seeking relief shall file with the Court a letter, not to
`
`exceed three pages, outlining the issues in dispute and the party’s position on those
`
`issues. The party shall submit as attachments to its letter (1) an averment of counsel that
`
`the parties made a reasonable effort to resolve the dispute and that such effort included
`
`oral communication that involved Delaware counsel for the parties, and (2) a draft order
`
`for the Court’s signature that identifies with specificity the relief sought by the party. The
`
`party shall file concurrently with its letter a motion that in no more than one paragraph
`
`sets forth the relief sought.
`
`(b)
`
`By no later than 48 hours prior to the conference/argument, any party
`
`opposing the application for relief may file a letter, not to exceed three pages, outlining
`
`that party’s reasons for its opposition.
`
`(0)
`
`Two hard copies of the parties’ letters and attachments must be provided
`
`to the Court within one hour of e-filing the document(s). The hard copies shall comply
`
`with paragraphs 10 and 14 of this Order.
`
`(d)
`
`If a motion concerning a discovery matter or protective order is filed
`
`without leave of the Court that does not comport with the procedures set forth in this
`
`paragraph, the motion will be denied without prejudice to the moving party’s right to bring
`
`the dispute to the Court through the procedures set forth in this paragraph.
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 10 of 20 PagelD #: 1473
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 10 of 20 PageID #: 1473
`
`13.
`
`Papers Filed Under Seal. When filing papers under seal, counsel shall deliver to
`
`the Clerk an original and two copies of the papers. A redacted version of any sealed document
`
`shall be filed electronically within seven days of the filing of the sealed document.
`
`14.
`
`Hard Copies. The parties shall provide to the Court two hard copies of all letters
`
`filed pursuant to paragraph 12 of this Order, all briefs, and any other document filed in support
`
`of any such letters and briefs (i.e., the concise statement of facts filed pursuant to paragraph 19 of
`
`this Order, appendices, exhibits, declarations, affidavits, etc.). This provision also applies to
`
`papers filed under seal. Exhibits and attachments shall be separated by tabs. Each exhibit and
`
`attachment shall have page numbers of some sort such that a particular page of an exhibit or
`
`attachment can be identified by a page number. The parties shall take all practical measures to
`
`avoid filing multiple copies of the same exhibit or attachment. The parties should highlight the
`
`text of exhibits and attachments they wish the Court to read. The parties are encouraged to
`
`include in an exhibit or attachment only the pages of the document in question that (1) identify
`
`the document (e.g., the first page of a deposition transcript or the cover page of a request for
`
`discovery) and (2) are relevant to the issue(s) before the Court.
`
`15.
`
`Claim Construction Issue Identification. On or before March 13, 2020, the parties
`
`shall exchange a list of those claim term(s)/phrase(s) that they believe need construction and will
`
`exchange their proposed claim construction of those term(s)/phrase(s) on March 20, 2020. This
`
`document will not be filed with the Court. Subsequent to exchanging that list, the parties will
`
`meet and confer to prepare a Joint Claim Construction Chart to be filed no later than April 1,
`
`2020. The Joint Claim Construction Chart, in Word format, shall be e-mailed simultaneously
`
`with filing to cfc_civil@ded.uscourts.gov. The text for the Joint Claim Construction Chart shall
`
`be 14-point and in Times New Roman or a similar typeface. The parties’ Joint Claim
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 11 of 20 PageID #: 1474
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 11 of 20 PageID #: 1474
`
`Construction Chart should identify for the Court the term(s)/phrase(s) of the claim(s) in issue and
`
`should include each party’s proposed construction of the disputed claim language with citation(s)
`
`only to the intrinsic evidence in support of their respective proposed constructions. A separate
`
`text-searchable PDF of each of the patent(s) in issue shall be submitted with this Joint Claim
`
`Construction Chart. In thisjoint submission, the parties shall not provide argument. Each party
`
`shall file concurrently with the Joint Claim Construction Chart a “Motion for Claim
`
`Construction” that requests the Court to adopt the claim construction position(s) of that party set
`
`forth in the Joint Claim Construction Chart. The motion shall not contain any argument and shall
`
`simply state that the party “requests that the Court adopt the claim construction position[s] of
`
`[the party] set forth in the Joint Claim Construction Chart (D.I. [ ]).”
`
`l6.
`
`Claim Construction Briefing. Plaintiffs shall serve, but not file, its opening brief,
`
`not to exceed 5,500 words, on May 1, 2020. Defendant shall serve, but not file, its answering
`
`brief, not to exceed 8,250 words, on May 29, 2020. Plaintiffs shall serve, but not file, their reply
`
`brief, not to exceed 5,500 words, on June 12, 2020. Defendant shall serve, but not file, its sur-
`
`reply brief, not to exceed 2,750 words, on June 26, 2020. The text for each brief shall be 14-
`
`point and in Times New Roman or a similar typeface. Each brief must include a certification by
`
`counsel that the brief complies with the type and number limitations set forth above. The person
`
`who prepares the certification may rely on the word count of the word-processing system used to
`
`prepare the brief.
`
`No later than July 2, 2020, the parties shall file a Joint Claim Construction Brief. The
`
`parties shall copy and paste their untitled briefs into one brief, with their positions on each claim
`
`term in sequential order, in substantially the form below.
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 12 of 20 PageID #: 1475
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 12 of 20 PageID #: 1475
`
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEF
`
`I.
`
`ll.
`
`Agreed-upon Constructions
`
`Disputed Constructions
`
`A.
`
`[TERM 1]
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiff’s Opening Position
`Defendant’s Answering Position
`Plaintiff’s Reply Position
`Defendant’s Sur-Reply Position
`
`B.
`
`[TERM 2]
`
`1.
`2.
`3.
`4.
`
`Plaintiff’s Opening Position
`Defendant’s Answering Position
`Plaintiff’s Reply Position
`Defendant’s Sur-Reply Position
`
`Etc. The parties need not include any general summaries of the law relating to claim
`
`construction. If there are any materials that would be submitted in an appendix, the parties shall
`
`submit them in a Joint Appendix. Citations to intrinsic evidence shall be set forth in the Joint
`
`Claim Construction Brief. Citations to expert declarations and other extrinsic evidence may be
`
`made in the Joint Claim Construction Brief as the parties deem necessary, but the Court will
`
`review such extrinsic evidence only if the Court is unable to construe the disputed claim terms
`
`based on the intrinsic evidence. See Vitrom'cs Corp. v. Conceptronic, Inc., 90 F.3d 1576, 1584
`
`(Fed. Cir. 1996). Declarations shall not contain legal argument or be used to circumvent the
`
`briefing word limitations imposed by this paragraph. The Joint Claim Construction Brief and
`
`Joint Appendix shall comply with paragraphs 10 and 14 of this Order.
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`Hearing on Claim Construction. Beginning at
`
`
`
`15 a
`
`’1'
`Si: '
`_&r.m. on August-L,
`
`17.
`
`2020, the Court will hear argument on claim construction. Absent prior approval of the Court
`
`(which, if it is sought, must be done byjoint letter submission no later than the date on which
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 13 of 20 PagelD #: 1476
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 13 of 20 PageID #: 1476
`
`answering claim construction briefs are due to be served), the parties shall not present testimony
`
`at the argument, and the argument shall not exceed a total of three hours.
`
`18.
`
`Disclosure of Expert Testimony.
`
`(a)
`
`Expert Reports. For the party with 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 March 26, 2021. The supplemental disclosure to contradict or rebut evidence
`
`on the same matter identified by another party is due on or before April 23, 2021. Reply
`
`expert reports from the party with the initial burden of proof are due on or before May
`
`14, 2021. 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 provide the dates and times of their experts’ availability for deposition. Depositions
`
`of experts shall be completed on or before June 11, 2021.
`
`(b)
`
`Objections to Expert Testimony. To the extent any objection to expert
`
`testimony is made pursuant to the principles announced in Daubert v. Merrell Dow
`
`Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 US. 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.
`
`19.
`
`Case Dispositive Motions.
`
`(a)
`
`No early motions without leave. All case dispositive motions, an opening
`
`brief, and affidavits, if any, in support of the motion shall be served and filed on or before
`
`July 23, 2021. No case dispositive motion under Rule 56 may be filed more than ten days
`
`before the above date without leave of the Court.
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 14 of 20 PagelD #: 1477
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 14 of 20 PageID #: 1477
`
`(b)
`
`Motions to be Filed Separately. A party shall not combine multiple
`
`motions seeking separate and distinct relief into a single motion.
`
`(0)
`
`Word limits combined with Daubert motion word limits. Each party is
`
`permitted to file as many case dispositive motions as desired; provided, however, that
`
`each SIDE will be limited to a combined total of 10,000 words for all opening briefs, a
`
`combined total of 10,000 words for all answering briefs, and a combined total of 5,000
`
`words for all reply briefs regardless of the number of case dispositive motions that are
`
`filed. In the event that a party files, in addition to a case dispositive motion, a Daubert
`
`motion to exclude or preclude all or any portion of an expert’s testimony, the total
`
`amount of words permitted for all case dispositive and Daubert motions shall be
`
`increased for each SIDE to 12,500 words for all opening briefs, 12,500 words for all
`
`answering briefs, and 6,250 words for all reply briefs. The text for each brief shall be 14-
`
`point and in Times New Roman or a similar typeface. Each brief must include a
`
`certification by counsel that the brief complies with the type and number limitations set
`
`forth above. The person who prepares the certification may rely on the word count of the
`
`word-processing system used to prepare the brief.
`
`(d)
`
`Concise Statement of Facts Reguirement. Any motion for summary
`
`judgment shall be accompanied by a separate concise statement detailing each material
`
`fact as to which the moving party contends that there are no genuine issues to be tried
`
`that are essential for the Court’s determination of the summaryjudgment motion (not the
`
`entire case)‘. Any party who opposes the motion shall file and serve with its opposing
`
`'
`
`A party does not satisfy the requirements of this paragraph by stating that an accused
`instrumentality infringes an asserted claim or asserted claim limitation. The party must detail
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 15 of 20 PagelD #: 1478
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 15 of 20 PageID #: 1478
`
`papers a separate document containing a single concise statement that admits or disputes
`
`the facts set forth in the moving party’s concise statement, as well as sets forth all
`
`material facts as to which it is contended there exists a genuine issue necessary to be
`
`litigated.
`
`(e)
`
`Focus of the Concise Statement. When preparing the separate concise
`
`statement, a party shall reference only the material facts that are absolutely necessary for
`
`the Court to determine the limited issues presented in the motion for summary judgment
`
`(and no others), and each reference shall contain a citation to a particular affidavit,
`
`deposition, or other document that supports the party’s interpretation of the material fact.
`
`Documents referenced in the concise statement may, but need not, be filed in their entirety
`
`if a party concludes that the full context would be helpful to the Court (e.g., a deposition
`
`miniscript with an index stating what pages may contain key words may often be useful).
`
`The concise statement shall particularly identify the page and portion of the page of the
`
`document referenced. The document referred to shall have relevant portions highlighted or
`
`otherwise emphasized. The parties may extract and highlight the relevant portions of each
`
`referenced document, but they shall ensure that enough of a document is attached to put
`
`the matter in context. If a party determines that an entire deposition transcript should be
`
`submitted, the party should consider whether a miniscript would be preferable to a full-
`
`size transcript. If an entire miniscript is submitted, the index of terms appearing in the
`
`transcript must be included, if it exists. When multiple pages from a single document are
`
`each material fact in its concise statement of facts. The concise statements of facts play an
`important gatekeeping role in the Court’s consideration of summary judgment motions.
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 16 of 20 PagelD #: 1479
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 16 of 20 PageID #: 1479
`
`submitted, the pages shall be grouped in a single exhibit. Concise statements of fact shall
`
`comply with paragraphs 10 and 14 of this Order.
`
`(f)
`
`Word Limits for Concise Statement. The concise statement in support of
`
`or in opposition to a motion for summaryjudgment shall be no longer than 1,750 words.
`
`The text for each statement shall be l4-point and in Times New Roman or a similar
`
`typeface. Each statement must include a certification by counsel that the statement
`
`complies with the type and number limitations set forth above. The person who prepares
`
`the certification may rely on the word count of the word-processing system used to
`
`prepare the statement.
`
`(g)
`
`Affidavits and declarations. Affidavits or declarations setting forth facts
`
`and/or authenticating exhibits, as well as exhibits themselves, shall be attached only to
`
`the concise statement (i.e., not briefs).
`
`(h)
`
`Scope of Judicial Review. When resolving motions for summary
`
`judgment, the Court shall have no independent duty to search and consider any part of the
`
`record not otherwise referenced in the separate concise statements of the parties. Further,
`
`the Court shall have no independent duty to review exhibits in their entirety, but rather
`
`will review only those portions of the exhibits specifically identified in the concise
`
`statements. Material facts set forth in the moving party’s concise statement will be
`
`deemed admitted unless controverted by a separate concise statement of the opposing
`
`party.
`
`20.
`
`Applications by Motion. Except as otherwise specified herein, any application to
`
`the Court shall be by written motion. Any non-dispositive motion should contain the statement
`
`required by Local Rule 7.1.1.
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 17 of 20 PagelD #: 1480
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 17 of 20 PageID #: 1480
`
`flaffln‘ffl ‘O
`2].
`Pretrial Conference. On W021, the Court will hold a Rule 16(e) final
`pretrial conference in court with counsel beginning at film The parties shall file ajoint
`
`proposed final pretrial order in compliance with Local Rule 16.3(c) no later than 5:00 pm. on the
`
`third business day before the date of the final pretrial conference. Unless otherwise ordered by
`
`the Court, the parties shall comply with the timeframes set forth in Local Rule 16.3(d) for the
`
`preparation of the proposed joint final pretrial order. Thejoint pretrial order shall comply with
`
`paragraphs 10 and 14 of this Order.
`
`22.
`
`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 in limine requests, unless otherwise permitted by the Court. Each in limine
`
`request and any response shall contain the authorities relied upon; each in [imine request may be
`
`supported by a maximum of three pages of argument and may be opposed by a maximum of
`
`three pages of argument, and the party making the in limine request may add a maximum of one
`
`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-
`
`page submission (and, if the moving party, a single one-page reply). No separate briefing shall be
`
`submitted on in limine requests, unless otherwise permitted by the Court. Motions in limine shall
`
`comply with paragraphs 10 and 14 of this Order.
`
`23.
`
`Compendium of Cases. A party may submit with any briefing two courtesy copies
`
`of a compendium of the selected authorities on which the party would like the Court to focus.
`
`The parties should not include in the compendium authorities for general principles or
`
`uncontested points of law (e.g., the standards for summaryjudgment or claim construction). An
`
`authority that is cited only once by a party generally should not be included in the compendium.
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 18 of 20 PagelD #: 1481
`Case 1:19-cv-01681-CFC-SRF Document 17 Filed 12/11/19 Page 18 of 20 PageID #: 1481
`
`An authority already provided to the Court by another party should not be included in the
`
`compendium. Compendiums of cases shall not be filed electronically with the Court, but a notice
`
`of service of a compendium of cases shall be filed electronically with the Court. Compendiums
`
`shall comply with paragraph 14 of this Order.
`
`24.
`
`Jury Instructions, Voir Dire and Special Verdict Forms. Where a case is to be
`
`tried to ajury, pursuant to Local Rules 47.](a)(2) and 51.1, the parties should file (i) proposed
`
`voir dire, (ii) preliminaryjury instructions, (iii) final jury instructions, and (iv) special verdict
`O¢+“¢P a. z'a‘z'l
`forms no later thanWWW
`
`confiscaee. The parties shall submit simultaneously with filing each o