throbber
Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 19 Filed 10/05/20 Page 1 of 10
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`Western District of Texas
`WACO DIVISION
`
`NO: WA:20-CV-00507-ADA
`
`§§§§§
`
`NEONODE SMARTPHONE LLC
`
`vs.
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,
`INC.
`
`ORDER GOVERNING PROCEEDINGS – PATENT CASE
`
`This Order shall govern proceedings in this case. The following deadlines are hereby set:
`
`This case is SET for a telephonic Rule 16 Case Management Conference on Friday,
`October 16, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. Participants shall dial into the following number 5
`minutes before the scheduled time: 866.434.5269; access code 967-8090. Lead counsel
`for each party, and all unrepresented parties, shall be present. Client representatives are
`welcome to attend, but such attendance is not required. In person attendance is
`permitted, but not required. Anyone planning to attend in person should so inform the
`Court by contacting chambers not later than two court days before the scheduled hearing
`so the Court can evaluate whether to hold the conference in the courtroom, or in
`chambers. The Court expects the parties to be prepared to discuss:
`
`a. an overview of the claims and defenses, including any unique issues the
`parties believe should be addressed at this stage of the case;
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`issues involving the case schedule and potential amendments to the
`Court’s default scheduling order, including the date for the Markman
`Hearing;
`
`issues relating to claim construction, including whether a live tutorial would be
`of benefit to the Court;
`
`issues relating to discovery, including potential amendments to the Court’s
`default discovery limits or Protective Order; and,
`
`e. any other issues the parties believe would lead to the just, speedy and
`inexpensive determination of this action.
`
`2.
`
`
`
`(Not later than 7 days before the CMC). Plaintiff shall serve preliminary infringement
`contentions in the form of a chart setting forth where in the accused product(s) each element
`of the asserted claims(s) are found. Plaintiff shall also identify the priority date (i.c.
`
`1
`
`APPLE 1036
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 19 Filed 10/05/20 Page 2 of 10
`
`
`
`
`3.
`
`
`
`
`4.
`
`
`
`
`
`5.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the earliest date of invention) for each asserted claim and produce: (1) all documents
`evidencing conception and reduction to practice for each claimed invention, and (2) a copy
`of the file history for each patent in suit.
`
`(Not later than 3 business days before the CMC). Lead counsel for each party shall meet and
`confer (either in person or by telephone), to discuss whether they believe the Court’s default
`Scheduling Order and default Discovery Limits are appropriate for this case, and any issues
`relating to the management of this case they intend to raise at the CMC.
`
`(Two weeks after the CMC). The Parties shall submit an agreed Scheduling Order. If the
`parties cannot agree, the parties shall submit a separate Joint Motion for entry of each Order
`briefly setting forth their respective positions on items where they cannot agree. Absent
`agreement of the parties, the Plaintiff shall be responsible for the timely submission of this
`and other Joint filings.
`
`(Two weeks after the CMC). Deadline for Motions to Transfer. The Court also adopts the
`following page limits and briefing schedule for Motions to Transfer:
`
`a. Opening – 15 pages
`
`b. Response – 15 pages, due 14 days after the Opening brief
`
`c. Reply – 5 pages, due 7 days after the Response brief
`
`(Seven weeks after the CMC). Defendant shall serve preliminary invalidity contentions in the
`form of (1) a chart setting forth where in the prior art references each element of the asserted
`claim(s) are found, (2) an identification of any limitations the Defendant contends are
`indefinite or lack written description under section 112, and (3) an identification of any
`claims the Defendant contends are directed to ineligible subject matter under section 101.
`Defendant shall also produce (1) all prior art referenced in the invalidity contentions, (2)
`technical documents, including software where applicable, sufficient to show the operation
`of the accused product(s), and (3) summary, annual sales information for the accused
`product(s) for the two years preceding the filing of the Complaint,1 unless the parties agree to
`some other timeframe.
`
`DISCOVERY
`
`Except with regard to venue, jurisdictional, and claim construction-related discovery, all other
`discovery is stayed until after the Markman hearing. Notwithstanding this general stay of discovery,
`the Court will permit limited discovery by agreement of the parties, or upon request, where
`exceptional circumstances warrant. For example, if discovery outside the United States is
`contemplated, the Court will be inclined to allow such discovery to commence before the Markman
`hearing.
`
`1 With regard to expired patents, the sales information shall be provided for the two years preceding expiration.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 19 Filed 10/05/20 Page 3 of 10
`
`With respect to venue and jurisdictional discovery, the Court generally grants leave for the parties to
`conduct targeted discovery (including, but not limited to requests for production, interrogatories, and
`depositions) with regard to motions to transfer venue or motions to dismiss based on lack of
`jurisdiction. If the parties disagree as to what reasonable discovery limits are, the Court encourages
`the parties to contact the Court to request a telephonic discovery hearing.
`Following the Markman hearing, the following discovery limits will apply to this case. The Court
`will consider reasonable requests to adjust these limits should circumstances warrant.
`
`1. Interrogatories: 30 per side2
`
`2. Requests for Admission: 45 per side
`
`3. Requests for Production: 75 per side
`
`4. Fact Depositions: 70 hours per side (for both party and non-party witnesses combined)
`
`5. Expert Depositions: 7 hours per report3
`
`Electronically Stored Information. As a preliminary matter, the Court will not require general
`search and production of email or other electronically stored information (ESI), absent a showing of
`good cause. If a party believes targeted email/ESI discovery is necessary, it shall propose a procedure
`identifying custodians and search terms it believes the opposing party should search. The opposing
`party can oppose, or propose an alternate plan. If the parties cannot agree, they shall contact
`chambers to schedule a call with the Court to discuss their respective positions.
`
`DISCOVERY DISPUTES
`
`A party may not file a Motion to Compel discovery unless: (1) lead counsel have met and conferred
`in good faith to try to resolve the dispute, and (2) the party has contacted the Court’s law clerk (with
`opposing counsel) to arrange a telephone conference with the Court to summarize the dispute and the
`parties respective positions. After hearing from the parties, the Court will determine if further
`briefing is required.
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`Pending entry of the final Protective Order, the Court issues the following interim Protective Order
`to govern the disclosure of confidential information in this matter:
`
`
`
`
`
`If any document or information produced in this matter is deemed confidential by the
`producing party and if the Court has not entered a protective order, until a protective
`order is issued by the Court, the document shall be marked “confidential” or with some
`
`2 A “side” shall mean the plaintiff (or related plaintiffs suing together) on the one hand, and the defendant (or
`related defendants sued together) on the other hand. In the event that the Court consolidates related cases for
`pretrial purposes, with regard to calculating limits imposed by this Order, a “side” shall be interpreted as if the
`cases were proceeding individually. For example, in consolidated cases the plaintiff may serve up to 30
`interrogatories on each defendant, and each defendant may serve up to 30 interrogatories on the plaintiff.
`3 For example, if a single technical expert submits reports on both infringement and invalidity, he or she may be
`deposed for up to 14 hours in total.
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 19 Filed 10/05/20 Page 4 of 10
`
`other confidential designation (such as “Confidential – Outside Attorneys Eyes
`Only”) by the disclosing party and disclosure of the confidential document or
`information shall be limited to each party’s outside attorney(s) of record and the
`employees of such outside attorney(s).
`
`If a party is not represented by an outside attorney, disclosure of the confidential
`document or information shall be limited to one designated “in house” attorney, whose
`identity and job functions shall be disclosed to the producing party 5 days prior to any
`such disclosure, in order to permit any motion for protective order or other relief
`regarding such disclosure. The person(s) to whom disclosure of a confidential
`document or information is made under this local rule shall keep it confidential and
`use it only for purposes of litigating the case.
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ISSUES
`Terms for Construction. Based on the Court’s experience, the Court believes that it should
`have presumed limits on the number of claim terms to be construed. The “presumed limit” is
`the maximum number of terms that the parties may request the Court to construe without
`further leave of Court. If the Court grants leave for the additional terms to be construed,
`depending on the complexity and number of terms, the Court may split the Markman hearing
`into two hearings.
`
`The presumed limits based on the number of patents-in-suit are as follows:
`
`Limits for Number of Claim Terms to be Construed
`
`1-2 Patents
`10 terms
`
`3-5 Patents
`12 terms
`
`More than 5 Patents
`15 terms
`
`When the parties submit their joint claim construction statement, in addition to the term and
`the parties’ proposed constructions, the parties should indicate which party or side proposed
`that term, or if that was a joint proposal.
`
`Claim Construction Briefing. The Court will require simultaneous claim construction
`briefing with the following default page limits; however, where exceptional circumstances
`warrant, the Court will consider reasonable requests to adjust these limits. These page limits
`shall also apply collectively for consolidated cases; however, the Court will consider
`reasonable requests to adjust page limits in consolidated cases where circumstances warrant.
`In addition, the Court is very familiar with the law of claim construction and encourages the
`parties to forego lengthy recitations of the underlying legal authorities and instead focus on the
`substantive issues unique to each case.
`
`Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, all simultaneous filings will take place at 5:00 p.m. CT.
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 19 Filed 10/05/20 Page 5 of 10
`
`Page Limits for Markman Briefs
`
`Brief
`Opening
`
`1-2 Patents
`20 pages
`
`3-5 Patents
`30 pages
`
`Response
`
`20 pages
`
`30 pages
`
`Reply
`
`10 pages
`
`15 pages
`
`More than 5 Patents
`30 pages, plus 5
`additional pages for
`each patent over 5 up
`to a maximum of 45
`pages
`30 pages, plus 5
`additional pages for
`each patent over 5 up
`to a maximum of 45
`pages
`15 pages, plus 2
`additional pages for
`each patent over 5 up
`to a maximum of 21
`pages
`
`Conduct of the Markman Hearing.
`
`The Court generally sets aside one half day for the Markman hearing; however, the Court is
`open to reserving more or less time, depending on the complexity of the case and input from
`the parties. The Court requires submission of technology tutorials in advance of the Markman
`hearing when they may be of benefit. The parties may submit tutorials in electronic form not
`later than one week before the Markman hearing and the Court encourages the parties to aim
`for tutorials with voiceovers in the 15 minute range. If a party intends to present a live tutorial,
`the parties should contact the Court to set-up a Zoom or telephonic tutorial to occur at least a
`week before the Markman hearing. In general, tutorials should be: (1) directed to the
`underlying technology (rather than argument related to infringement or validity), and (2)
`limited to 15 minutes per side. For the Court’s convenience, the tutorial may be recorded, but
`will not be part of the record. Parties may not rely on or cite to the tutorial in other aspects of the
`litigation.
`
`The Court will consider the parties suggestions on the order of argument at the Markman
`hearing. However, if the parties do not suggest a different procedure, the Court will allow the
`Plaintiff to pick the first term and then alternate by term. As a general rule, if one side
`proposes “plain and ordinary meaning” as its construction or asserts that a term is indefinite,
`the other party shall go first.
`
`GENERALISSUES
`
`1. The Court does not have a limit on the number of motions for summary judgment (MSJs);
`
`however, absent leave of Court, the cumulative page limit for Opening Briefs for all MSJs
`
`is 40 pages per side.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 19 Filed 10/05/20 Page 6 of 10
`
`2.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3.
`
`
`
`4.
`
`
`5.
`
`
`
`
`6.
`
`
`
`7.
`
`
`There may be instances where the submission of substantive briefs via audio file will be of
`help to the Court. If a party is contemplating submitting a brief via audio file it should
`contact the Court for guidance on whether it would be helpful to the Court. However, the
`Court has determined that audio recordings of Markman briefs are of limited value and those
`need not be submitted. The recordings shall be made in a neutral fashion, shall be verbatim
`transcriptions without additional colloquy (except that citations and legal authority sections
`need not be included), and each such file shall be served on opposing counsel. The Court
`does not have a preference for the manner of recording and has found automated software
`recordings, as well as attorney recordings, to be more than satisfactory. Audio files shall be
`submitted via USB drive, Box (not another cloud storage), or email to the law clerk (with a
`cc to opposing counsel) and should be submitted in mp3 format.
`
`The Court will entertain reasonable requests to streamline the case schedule and
`discoveryand encourages the parties to contact the Court’s law clerk (with opposing counsel)
`toarrange a call with the Court when such interaction might help streamline the case.
`
`The Court is generally willing to extend the response to the Complaint up to 45 days ifagreed
`by the parties. However, longer extensions are disfavored and will require goodcause.
`
`For Markman briefs, summary judgment motions, and Daubert motions, each party
`shalldeliver to Chambers one (1) paper copy of its Opening, Response, and Reply Briefs,
`omittingattachments, no later than one week after the last-filed brief or at least a week before
`the hearing, whichever is earlier.
`
`Plaintiff must file a notice informing the Court when an IPR is filed, the expected time for an
`institution decision, and the expected time for a final written decision, within two weeks of
`the filing of the IPR.
`
`To the extent the parties need to email the Court, the parties should use the following
`emailaddress: TXWDml_LawClerks_JudgeAlbright@txwd.uscourts.gov.
`
`ORDERED this 5th day of October, 2020.
`
`ALAN D ALBRIGHT
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 19 Filed 10/05/20 Page 7 of 10
`
`Deadline
`7 days before CMC
`
`2 weeks after CMC
`7 weeks after CMC
`
`9 weeks after CMC
`11 weeks after CMC
`12 weeks after CMC
`
`APPENDIX A – DEFAULT SCHEDULE
`
`Item
`Plaintiff serves preliminary4 infringement contentions in the
`form of a chart setting forth where in the accused product(s)
`each element of the asserted claim(s) are found. Plaintiff shall
`also identify the earliest priority date (i.e. the earliest date of
`invention) for each asserted claim and produce: (1) all
`documents evidencing conception and reduction to practice
`for each claimed invention, and (2) a copy of the file history
`for each patent in suit.
`Deadline for Motions to Transfer.
`Defendant serves preliminary invalidity contentions in the
`form of (1) a chart setting forth where in the prior art
`references each element of the asserted claim(s) are found, (2)
`an identification of any limitations the Defendant contends are
`indefinite or lack written description under section 112, and
`(3) an identification of any claims the Defendant contends are
`directed to ineligible subject matter under section 101.
`Defendant shall also produce (1) all prior art referenced in the
`invalidity contentions, (2) technical documents, including
`software where applicable, sufficient to show the operation of
`the accused product(s), and (3) summary, annual sales
`information for the accused product(s) for the two years
`preceding the filing of the Complaint, unless the parties agree
`to some other timeframe.
`Parties exchange claim terms for construction.
`Parties exchange proposed claim constructions.
`Parties disclose extrinsic evidence. The parties shall disclose
`any extrinsic evidence, including the identity of any expert
`witness they may rely upon with respect to claim construction
`or indefiniteness. With respect to any expert identified, the
`parties shall also provide a summary of the witness’s expected
`testimony including the opinions to be expressed and a
`general description of the basis and reasons therefor. A
`
`4 The parties may amend preliminary infringement contentions and preliminary invalidity contentions without
`leave of court so long as counsel certifies that it undertook reasonable efforts to prepare its preliminary
`contentions and the amendment is based on material identified after those preliminary contentions were served,
`and should do so seasonably upon identifying any such material. Any amendment to add patent claims requires
`leave of court so that the Court can address any scheduling issues.
`
`OGP Version 3.0
`
`7
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 19 Filed 10/05/20 Page 8 of 10
`
`failure to summarize the potential expert testimony in a good
`faith, informative fashion may result in the exclusion of the
`proffered testimony. With respect to items of extrinsic
`evidence, the parties shall identify each such item by
`production number or produce a copy of any such item if not
`previously produced.
`Deadline to meet and confer to narrow terms in dispute and
`exchange revised list of terms/constructions.
`Parties file Opening claim construction briefs, including any
`arguments that any claim terms are indefinite.
`Parties file Responsive claim construction briefs.
`Parties file Reply claim construction briefs.
`Parties submit Joint Claim Construction Statement. In
`addition to filing, the parties shall jointly submit, via USB
`drive, Box (not another cloud storage),5 or email to the law
`clerk, pdf versions of all as-filed briefing and exhibits. Each
`party shall deliver to Chambers paper copies of its Opening,
`Response , and Reply Markman Briefs, omitting attachments.
`Absent agreement of the parties, the Plaintiff shall be
`responsible for the timely submission of this and other Joint
`filings.
`Parties submit optional technical tutorials. The parties shall
`also jointly submit, via USB drive, Box (not another cloud
`storage), or email to the law clerk, pdf versions of all as-filed
`briefing and exhibits.
`Markman Hearing at [9:00 a.m. or 1:00 p.m.]
`
`Fact Discovery opens; deadline to serve Initial Disclosures per
`Rule 26(a).
`Deadline to add parties.
`
`Deadline to serve Final Infringement and Invalidity
`Contentions. After this date, leave of Court is required for
`any amendment to Infringement or Invalidity contentions.
`This deadline does not relieve the Parties of their obligation to
`
`13 weeks after CMC
`
`14 weeks after CMC
`
`17 weeks after CMC
`19 weeks after CMC
`20 weeks after CMC
`
`23 weeks after CMC (but
`at least 1 week before
`Markman hearing)
`
`24 weeks after CMC (or as
`soon as practicable)
`1 business day after
`Markman hearing
`6 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`8 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`
`5 To the extent a party wishes to use cloud storage, the parties should contact the law clerk to request a Box link
`so that the party can directly upload the file to the Court’s Box account.
`8
`
`OGP Version 3.0
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 19 Filed 10/05/20 Page 9 of 10
`
`12 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`26 weeks after Markman
`
`30 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`31 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`35 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`38 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`39 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`
`40 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`42 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`44 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`45 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`
`OGP Version 3.0
`
`seasonably amend if new information is identified after initial
`contentions.
`Deadline to amend pleadings. A motion is not required unless
`the amendment adds patents or patent claims.
`Deadline for the first of two meet and confers to discuss
`significantly narrowing the number of claims asserted and
`prior art references at issue. Unless the parties agree to the
`narrowing, they are ordered to contact the Court’s Law Clerk
`to arrange a teleconference with the Court to resolve the
`disputed issues.
`Close of Fact Discovery.
`
`Opening Expert Reports.
`
`Rebuttal Expert Reports.
`
`Close of Expert Discovery.
`
`Deadline for the second of two meet and confer to discuss
`narrowing the number of claims asserted and prior art
`references at issue to triable limits. To the extent it helps the
`parties determine these limits, the parties are encouraged to
`contact the Court’s Law Clerk for an estimate of the amount
`of trial time anticipated per side. The parties shall file a Joint
`Report within 5 business days regarding the results of the
`meet and confer.
`Dispositive motion deadline and Daubert motion deadline.
`
`Serve Pretrial Disclosures (jury instructions, exhibits lists,
`witness lists, discovery and deposition designations).
`Serve objections to pretrial disclosures/rebuttal disclosures.
`
`Serve objections to rebuttal disclosures and File Motions in
`limine.
`
`9
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 19 Filed 10/05/20 Page 10 of 10
`
`46 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`
`47 weeks after Markman
`hearing
`
`File Joint Pretrial Order and Pretrial Submissions (jury
`instructions, exhibits lists, witness lists, discovery and
`deposition designations); file oppositions to motions in limine
`File Notice of Request for Daily Transcript or Real Time
`Reporting. If a daily transcript or real time reporting of court
`proceedings is requested for trial, the party or parties making
`said request shall file a notice with the Court and e-mail the
`Court Reporter, Kristie Davis at kmdaviscsr@yahoo.com
`
`3 business days before
`Final Pretrial Conference.
`49 weeks after Markman
`hearing (or as soon as
`practicable)
`52 weeks after Markman
`hearing (or as soon as
`practicable)6
`
`Deadline to meet and confer regarding remaining objections
`and disputes on motions in limine.
`File joint notice identifying remaining objections to pretrial
`disclosures and disputes on motions in limine.
`Final Pretrial Conference. The Court expects to set this date
`at the conclusion of the Markman Hearing.
`
`Jury Selection/Trial. The Court expects to set these dates at
`the conclusion of the Markman Hearing.
`
`6 If the actual trial date materially differs from the Court’s default schedule, the Court will consider reasonable
`amendments to the case schedule post-Markman that are consistent with the Court’s default deadlines in light of
`the actual trial date.
`
`OGP Version 3.0
`
`10
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket