`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`
`WACO DIVISION
`
`March 26, 2020
`
`CIVIL ACTION NOS.
`
`W-19-CV-712
`W-19-CV-714
`W-19-CV-716
`
`*
`
`* *
`
`*
`*
`*
`*
`*
`
`BROADBAND ITV, INC.
`
`VS.
`
`AT&T SERVICES, INC., ET AL
`DIRECTV, LLC
`DISH NETWORK, LLC
`
`BEFORE THE HONORABLE ALAN D ALBRIGHT, JUDGE PRESIDING
`TELEPHONIC SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`11
`
`For the Plaintiff:
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Jeremiah A. Armstrong, Esq.
`Robert F. Kramer, Esq.
`Feinberg Day Kramer Alberti Lim
` Tonkovich & Beloli
`577 Airport Blvd., Suite 250
`Burlingame, CA 94010
`
`Jack Wesley Hill, Esq.
`Ward Smith & Hill, PLLC
`1507 Bill Owens Pkwy
`Longview, TX 75604
`
`Andrea L. Fair, Esq.
`Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC
`PO Box 1231
`Longview, TX 75606
`
`For Defendants AT&T & DirecTV:
`
`Roger J. Fulghum, Esq.
`Baker Botts LLP
`One Shell Plaza, 910 Louisiana
`Houston, TX 77002
`
`Timothy S. Durst, Esq.
`Baker Botts L.L.P.
`2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 600
`Dallas, TX 75201-2980
`
`BBiTV EX2020
`AT&T v. Broadband iTV
`IPR2021-00556
`
`
`
`For Defendant Dish Network:
`
`2
`
`John P. Palmer, Esq.
`Naman Howell Smith & Lee
`P.O. Box 1470
`Waco, TX 76703-1470
`
`Clement Seth Roberts, Esq.
`Alyssa Caridis, Esq.
`Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
`405 Howard Street
`San Francisco, CA 94105
`
`Kristie M. Davis
`United States District Court
`PO Box 20994
`Waco, Texas 76702-0994
`
`Court Reporter:
`
`Proceedings recorded by mechanical stenography, transcript
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`produced by computer-aided transcription.
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`3
`
`(March 26, 2020, 3:42 p.m.)
`
`THE COURT: Gentlemen, this is Alan Albright. Let me
`
`start.
`
`Mr. Hill, are you going to be speaking on behalf of
`
`plaintiff?
`
`MR. HILL: Yes, sir, Your Honor. I will be. And if I
`
`need assistance with something, Mr. Kramer may speak up as
`
`well.
`
`THE COURT: Okay. And then I heard the warm, comforting
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:42
`
`03:42
`
`03:42
`
`03:42
`
`03:42
`
`03:42
`
`03:42
`
`03:42
`
`03:42
`
`10
`
`voice of Robert Fulghum in there, which I haven't heard in way
`
`03:42
`
`11
`
`too long. Good -- good to hear from you and Mr. Durst again,
`
`03:42
`
`12
`
`and so welcome aboard. Mr. Fulghum, who will speaking on
`
`03:42
`
`13
`
`behalf of AT&T?
`
`03:42
`
`14
`
`MR. FULGHUM: Judge, thanks for that warm welcome. And
`
`03:42
`
`15
`
`I'll be speaking for AT&T and DirecTV.
`
`03:42
`
`16
`
`THE COURT: And then, Mr. Palmer, will you or Mr. Roberts
`
`03:42
`
`17
`
`be speaking?
`
`03:43
`
`18
`
`MR. ROBERTS: I'll be speaking, Your Honor. This is
`
`03:43
`
`19
`
`Mr. Roberts.
`
`03:43
`
`20
`
`THE COURT: Mr. Roberts, you are the first person I've met
`
`03:43
`
`21
`
`ever, I think, that has the same first name as my grandfather
`
`03:43
`
`22
`
`did. So I just -- you know, I look forward to having you in my
`
`03:43
`
`23
`
`court.
`
`03:43
`
`24
`
`So I apologize. I'm going to -- did I get everyone who
`
`03:43
`
`25
`
`might be speaking? I hope so.
`
`
`
`4
`
`Okay. I'll take that as a yes.
`
`I'm looking at my cheat sheet that Josh prepared for me,
`
`and it looks like in this case that if I'm correct -- good
`
`gosh. Let me see just what we've got here. I apologize.
`
`We've run over a little bit. So -- but what I have down here
`
`is that there is some desire to have early discovery on behalf
`
`of defendants; is that correct?
`
`MR. HILL: Your Honor, Wesley Hill for the plaintiff.
`
`Actually, it's some early discovery on behalf of the plaintiff.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:43
`
`03:43
`
`03:43
`
`03:43
`
`03:43
`
`03:43
`
`03:43
`
`03:43
`
`03:44
`
`03:44
`
`10
`
`THE COURT: Oh, okay. Then I misread Josh's notes.
`
`03:44
`
`11
`
`Mr. Hill, if you would be so kind as to tell me what it is that
`
`03:44
`
`12
`
`you need.
`
`03:44
`
`13
`
`MR. HILL: Yes, Your Honor. What we're interested in is
`
`03:44
`
`14
`
`pursuing some third-party document discovery related to the
`
`03:44
`
`15
`
`operation of the accused products. These would -- this would
`
`03:44
`
`16
`
`be material in the possession of third parties that we think
`
`03:44
`
`17
`
`that in a case where it was in possession of a defendant would
`
`03:44
`
`18
`
`be something that was responsive to their obligation to produce
`
`03:44
`
`19
`
`materials sufficient to show the operation of an accused
`
`03:44
`
`20
`
`product with their invalidity contentions.
`
`03:44
`
`21
`
`In our case that material in some instances is going to be
`
`03:44
`
`22
`
`in the possession of a third party. There's five of them in
`
`03:44
`
`23
`
`particular. We provided a list of those to Mr. Yi before the
`
`03:44
`
`24
`
`call and had discussed those with the defendants. And our
`
`03:44
`
`25
`
`hope, Your Honor, was that we could take this third-party
`
`
`
`5
`
`document discovery regarding the technical operation of the
`
`product in parallel with the defendants also producing that
`
`information with their invalidity contentions or their portion
`
`of that information and then we would have the full set of
`
`information a plaintiff would normally have, pre-Markman,
`
`post-invalidity contentions, to prepare for the claim
`
`construction process and get ready to move forward with the
`
`case thereafter. And so that is the discovery we seek.
`
`THE COURT: Okay. And tell me -- help me out just a
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:44
`
`03:45
`
`03:45
`
`03:45
`
`03:45
`
`03:45
`
`03:45
`
`03:45
`
`03:45
`
`03:45
`
`10
`
`little bit more about when you say you'd like third-party
`
`03:45
`
`11
`
`discovery. What -- are you talking subpoenaing documents, or
`
`03:45
`
`12
`
`are you talking depositions? What is it that you'd like to get
`
`03:45
`
`13
`
`done?
`
`03:45
`
`14
`
`MR. HILL: Yes, Your Honor. We're looking at document
`
`03:45
`
`15
`
`subpoenas. So our focus is on the document subpoenas. Now,
`
`03:45
`
`16
`
`you know, obviously there could -- a situation could arise
`
`03:45
`
`17
`
`where a deposition became necessary, but in the first instance
`
`03:45
`
`18
`
`we're looking for document subpoenas. And if there was any
`
`03:45
`
`19
`
`bigger issue where a depo was necessary, we would raise that
`
`03:45
`
`20
`
`with defendant and the third party and of course come back to
`
`03:46
`
`21
`
`the Court if we couldn't resolve that by agreement.
`
`03:46
`
`22
`
`THE COURT: Okay. Let me hear from Mr. Fulghum.
`
`03:46
`
`23
`
`MR. FULGHUM: To start with, Mr. Roberts is going to start
`
`03:46
`
`24
`
`for us.
`
`03:46
`
`25
`
`THE COURT: Mr. Roberts.
`
`
`
`6
`
`MR. ROBERTS: Your Honor, if that would be okay.
`
`THE COURT: Of course.
`
`MR. ROBERTS: And Mr. Fulghum, I think, would like to be
`
`heard on this as well.
`
`Your Honor, we would oppose that for a couple of reasons.
`
`The first is, I want to just make sure the Court's aware that
`
`this is a slightly unusual case in that we don't yet have the
`
`infringement contentions from the plaintiff. Normally I
`
`understand under the Court's rules we would have the
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:46
`
`03:46
`
`03:46
`
`03:46
`
`03:46
`
`03:46
`
`03:46
`
`03:46
`
`03:46
`
`03:46
`
`10
`
`infringement contentions, and so we would be able to look with
`
`03:46
`
`11
`
`them at what it is that they need from us in terms of documents
`
`03:46
`
`12
`
`and whether or not third parties actually have relevant
`
`03:46
`
`13
`
`documents. But because of the COVID problems, we agreed to the
`
`03:46
`
`14
`
`plaintiff's request to push that out for two weeks. And so we
`
`03:46
`
`15
`
`don't yet have those contentions.
`
`03:46
`
`16
`
`So from my perspective looking at this, other than the
`
`03:47
`
`17
`
`facts that it's not provided for in the rules, we don't have
`
`03:47
`
`18
`
`any reason to think that third-party documents are really
`
`03:47
`
`19
`
`necessary because we don't have their contentions, and we
`
`03:47
`
`20
`
`therefore don't have any reason to think that we wouldn't have
`
`03:47
`
`21
`
`all of the information necessary for them relative to an
`
`03:47
`
`22
`
`infringement theory.
`
`03:47
`
`23
`
`And in light of that sort of lack of information and also
`
`03:47
`
`24
`
`obviously the substantial burdens that come with third-party
`
`03:47
`
`25
`
`discovery not only for us because we have to go and talk to
`
`
`
`7
`
`those third parties insofar as they're partners of ours, work
`
`out defense agreements, have conversations with third-party
`
`counsel, talk through indemnity, all of those issues that come
`
`along with it --
`
`THE REPORTER: Counsel, can you please slow down?
`
`MR. ROBERTS: Too fast?
`
`THE REPORTER: Yes.
`
`MR. ROBERTS: Yes. Absolutely.
`
`THE REPORTER: Thank you.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:47
`
`03:47
`
`03:47
`
`03:47
`
`10
`
`MR. ROBERTS: I'm from Boston, northeast, bad habit. My
`
`03:47
`
`11
`
`apologies, ma'am.
`
`03:47
`
`12
`
`The burden on the third parties themselves is also, I
`
`03:47
`
`13
`
`think, material here. Obviously they're not here to defend
`
`03:48
`
`14
`
`themselves. But we don't actually even know what the
`
`03:48
`
`15
`
`plaintiffs are asking for with this document discovery because
`
`03:48
`
`16
`
`they haven't told us. And they didn't give us the names of the
`
`03:48
`
`17
`
`third parties until last night even though we had the call to
`
`03:48
`
`18
`
`discuss this previously.
`
`03:48
`
`19
`
`So I'm at a bit of a disadvantage in terms of even
`
`03:48
`
`20
`
`evaluating the request because I don't know what the
`
`03:48
`
`21
`
`contentions are. I don't know what we would have and the third
`
`03:48
`
`22
`
`parties would have. I don't know what documents they want from
`
`03:48
`
`23
`
`the third parties, and we haven't had a chance to discuss it.
`
`03:48
`
`24
`
`So my -- my view is that the Court ought to sort of deny
`
`03:48
`
`25
`
`it, and if after we get their contentions, we produce the
`
`
`
`8
`
`information the Court requires us to produce, they think they
`
`don't have it, we have a normal meet and confer where we talk
`
`about what additional categories of information they think they
`
`need from us or from third parties, and then if there's a
`
`focused dispute, we can bring it back to the Court very quickly
`
`is our understanding. But that's how we would propose to
`
`proceed.
`
`THE COURT: Mr. Fulghum?
`
`MR. FULGHUM: Let me just make a couple of points.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:48
`
`03:48
`
`03:48
`
`03:48
`
`03:48
`
`03:48
`
`03:49
`
`03:49
`
`03:49
`
`03:49
`
`10
`
`Everyone knows who comes into this courtroom that this Court
`
`03:49
`
`11
`
`has a well-established structure for managing discovery, for
`
`03:49
`
`12
`
`managing claim construction. There are a lot of obvious
`
`03:49
`
`13
`
`benefits from having claim construction in delaying the start
`
`03:49
`
`14
`
`of discovery. It allows both parties to focus on their
`
`03:49
`
`15
`
`contentions. It allows the defendant to focus on its
`
`03:49
`
`16
`
`invalidity contentions. And it allows both parties to focus on
`
`03:49
`
`17
`
`claim construction to get the claims construed, to get the
`
`03:49
`
`18
`
`indefinite claims out of the case and then to move forward with
`
`03:49
`
`19
`
`discovery on a more focused basis. That has savings and
`
`03:49
`
`20
`
`benefits for everyone. If we're going to allow discovery of
`
`03:49
`
`21
`
`products in advance to aid one side or another's contentions,
`
`03:49
`
`22
`
`then I think that disserves the balance that's been set up in
`
`03:49
`
`23
`
`this court. And we all knew these rules coming in. We all
`
`03:49
`
`24
`
`knew how this court functioned coming in. Broadband iTV knew
`
`03:50
`
`25
`
`that when they filed this lawsuit. So we would request that
`
`
`
`9
`
`this either be denied or at least postponed as Mr. Roberts
`
`proposed.
`
`THE COURT: Let me ask you this -- let me start this way.
`
`Mr. Hill, is there anyone that you are seeking -- that you
`
`think you will be seeking this kind of discovery from where if
`
`you -- let me give you an example. And I think of the case
`
`where Mr. Durst and I were sitting, unfortunately, across the
`
`table from each other. As I recall, we had a case where there
`
`was a piece of art that we thought was located in a German
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:50
`
`03:50
`
`03:50
`
`03:50
`
`03:50
`
`03:50
`
`03:50
`
`03:50
`
`03:50
`
`03:50
`
`10
`
`university library which meant it wasn't going to be overly
`
`03:50
`
`11
`
`easy to obtain.
`
`03:50
`
`12
`
`Is there any -- is there anything that you're seeking that
`
`03:50
`
`13
`
`you think if I delay your ability to start asking for it, that
`
`03:51
`
`14
`
`it will -- you won't be able to get it? Are there any of the
`
`03:51
`
`15
`
`third parties in that group? And if so, let me -- why don't
`
`03:51
`
`16
`
`you put them on the record, and then I can hear from opposing
`
`03:51
`
`17
`
`counsel of their views on it. So let's limit the discussion
`
`03:51
`
`18
`
`being to just that.
`
`03:51
`
`19
`
`MR. HILL: Okay. Thank you, Your Honor. Judge, I do not
`
`03:51
`
`20
`
`think that the five parties that we've identified would be
`
`03:51
`
`21
`
`entities that are overseas or would require international
`
`03:51
`
`22
`
`discovery. Ericsson is one. There's an Ericsson entity. But,
`
`03:51
`
`23
`
`you know, beyond that, that they would be entities that we
`
`03:51
`
`24
`
`couldn't get discovery from later in the case. I've got to
`
`03:51
`
`25
`
`concede that to the Court.
`
`
`
`10
`
`But the issue -- Your Honor, the biggest -- for instance,
`
`the biggest potential target for this third-party discovery
`
`would be Comcast. This -- this case deals with patents that in
`
`part cover the delivery of video-on-demand services. And there
`
`are connections -- or there are interrelationships between the
`
`defendants in this case and some cloud services at Comcast and
`
`others provide to -- provide the content that is delivered over
`
`those video-on-demand services.
`
`And so this really is material that would go to the
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:51
`
`03:51
`
`03:51
`
`03:51
`
`03:52
`
`03:52
`
`03:52
`
`03:52
`
`03:52
`
`03:52
`
`10
`
`operation of the accused products and it's materials that we by
`
`03:52
`
`11
`
`reason of what we can tell publicly. And, again, as the
`
`03:52
`
`12
`
`plaintiff we're at a disadvantage in what we can know. But
`
`03:52
`
`13
`
`from what we can tell publicly may be in the possession of
`
`03:52
`
`14
`
`these third parties, we're not going to see it from the
`
`03:52
`
`15
`
`defendants necessarily.
`
`03:52
`
`16
`
`And so we were looking at trying to get ourselves in a
`
`03:52
`
`17
`
`position where that we would be in the same shape at the time
`
`03:52
`
`18
`
`that invalidity contention disclosures are served as you would
`
`03:52
`
`19
`
`be in the normal case where a defendant has complete possession
`
`03:52
`
`20
`
`of materials that are pertinent to show the operation of the
`
`03:53
`
`21
`
`accused product.
`
`03:53
`
`22
`
`THE COURT: Well, let me tell you what I'm going to do. I
`
`03:53
`
`23
`
`am extremely reluctant to alter any one piece of the structure
`
`03:53
`
`24
`
`I have for how things are done. So here's what I'm going to
`
`03:53
`
`25
`
`do. You know, fortunately, I'm very familiar with the lawyers
`
`
`
`11
`
`on the defense side, and I -- the representation I took from
`
`defense counsel was pretty much, Judge, we think we probably
`
`have everything, and that ought to be the starting point.
`
`And so I'm going to presume that that's correct. And so,
`
`you know, they're -- if you need something, you know, they have
`
`their obligation of what they -- you know, we all have our
`
`obligations here what to provide. If it turns out, once the
`
`plaintiff starts obtaining information from third parties, that
`
`you receive information that the defendant did not provide to
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:53
`
`03:53
`
`03:53
`
`03:53
`
`03:53
`
`03:53
`
`03:54
`
`03:54
`
`03:54
`
`03:54
`
`10
`
`you and you believe that it affected your ability to make
`
`03:54
`
`11
`
`infringement contentions, then, you know, you need to of course
`
`03:54
`
`12
`
`first ask defense counsel whether they're going to oppose you
`
`03:54
`
`13
`
`or not. But the Court is -- part of the reason I hold off on
`
`03:54
`
`14
`
`those kind of discovery through Markman is I really want to get
`
`03:54
`
`15
`
`parties focused on the Markman.
`
`03:54
`
`16
`
`As you know, Mr. Hill, you're going to have the
`
`03:54
`
`17
`
`constructions the same day as the Markman, and so if -- down
`
`03:54
`
`18
`
`the road if you're able to show me any prejudice by my decision
`
`03:54
`
`19
`
`in March of 2020 in terms of not having been able to get
`
`03:55
`
`20
`
`information from third parties, I can assure you I'm going to
`
`03:55
`
`21
`
`be very liberal in allowing you to amend your infringement
`
`03:55
`
`22
`
`contentions. I understand why an argument could be made that
`
`03:55
`
`23
`
`it'd be better for you to have it now and not have to go
`
`03:55
`
`24
`
`through that process, but there are an awful lot of
`
`03:55
`
`25
`
`procedural -- procedures I have in my -- up through Markman
`
`
`
`12
`
`that are all tied together, and that's just one of the
`
`consequences of it.
`
`So I -- you will -- again, if for any reason -- let me
`
`make clear, for any reason plaintiff feels like they will be
`
`disadvantaged in terms of -- because of who the third party is,
`
`they won't be able to quickly get discovery once discovery
`
`begins immediately after the Markman, please let me know, and
`
`I'm happy to adjust and allow you to get started sooner to make
`
`sure that you're not prejudiced just by that delay for that
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:55
`
`03:55
`
`03:55
`
`03:55
`
`03:55
`
`03:55
`
`03:55
`
`03:55
`
`03:56
`
`03:56
`
`10
`
`reason. But if you think you're going to be able to get to
`
`03:56
`
`11
`
`discovery, then I think you said that.
`
`03:56
`
`12
`
`Also let me put down on the record, just so you all have
`
`03:56
`
`13
`
`it down the road when I can't remember this case from others,
`
`03:56
`
`14
`
`when counsel for defendant is dealing with the third-party
`
`03:56
`
`15
`
`lawyers, who -- I assume they will be in terms of production,
`
`03:56
`
`16
`
`defense counsel who's on the line should let those parties know
`
`03:56
`
`17
`
`that I am strongly encouraging them to cooperate with what the
`
`03:56
`
`18
`
`plaintiff is seeking as long as it's done in a -- obviously in
`
`03:56
`
`19
`
`a manner that is only asking for relevant documents. But I
`
`03:56
`
`20
`
`will make sure that the plaintiff doesn't suffer any prejudice
`
`03:56
`
`21
`
`in terms of their ability to get stuff from third parties by my
`
`03:57
`
`22
`
`denial to allow you to do that now. So...
`
`03:57
`
`23
`
`MR. ROBERTS: Your Honor, this is Mr. Roberts. If I could
`
`03:57
`
`24
`
`just say one thing, because I want to make sure that my
`
`03:57
`
`25
`
`statements were clear to the Court, especially since you got --
`
`
`
`13
`
`you know, took them as a representation. We assume on the
`
`defense side that they have means to the proper parties. And
`
`as I said, we don't have their infringement contentions yet.
`
`So my view that we ought to have everything is based upon the
`
`notion that they're suing us and not making some kind of joint
`
`infringement allegation that we're the defendant, that it's our
`
`products that they claim to infringe and therefore that the
`
`material would be in our possession. But I -- I do not have
`
`their infringement theories yet in hand, and so I'm somewhat
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:57
`
`03:57
`
`03:57
`
`03:57
`
`03:57
`
`03:57
`
`03:57
`
`03:57
`
`03:57
`
`03:57
`
`10
`
`handicapped in my ability to make that prediction.
`
`03:57
`
`11
`
`So I just wanted to add that note of caution so that if we
`
`03:57
`
`12
`
`return to it later, the Court understood the context.
`
`03:57
`
`13
`
`THE COURT: I've been on your side of the case at least as
`
`03:57
`
`14
`
`many times as the plaintiff's side. I fully understand exactly
`
`03:57
`
`15
`
`what you meant. And so you are at no peril with me. I'm just
`
`03:57
`
`16
`
`trying to --
`
`03:58
`
`17
`
`MR. ROBERTS: Thank you.
`
`03:58
`
`18
`
`THE COURT: I'm just trying to let everyone know that I
`
`03:58
`
`19
`
`want it on the record why it is I think at this point I would
`
`03:58
`
`20
`
`not allow that third-party discovery to take place. Again, I'm
`
`03:58
`
`21
`
`not going to -- and I -- as -- at least -- well, all of you
`
`03:58
`
`22
`
`know, I guess. You've all been in front of me a bunch. It
`
`03:58
`
`23
`
`never goes over well with me for the argument to start off by
`
`03:58
`
`24
`
`anybody about how the other party, the other lawyers are -- you
`
`03:58
`
`25
`
`know, say something crappy about the other side. I know all
`
`
`
`14
`
`the lawyers in this group pretty much. I'm anticipating all of
`
`you guys acting the way I would really want lawyers to act.
`
`And if -- when this comes up, if it turns out the plaintiff
`
`needs third-party discovery because it was unavailable from the
`
`defendants in this case, they just need to let me know that.
`
`And they need to let you know that first, but if you guys can't
`
`work it out, just come to me. And it's very rare -- I think
`
`everyone on the phone knows that I will take that as a sign of
`
`bad faith. And I really don't like lawyers starting off by
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`03:58
`
`03:58
`
`03:58
`
`03:58
`
`03:58
`
`03:59
`
`03:59
`
`03:59
`
`03:59
`
`03:59
`
`10
`
`accusing other lawyers of not acting in good faith as -- in any
`
`03:59
`
`11
`
`way. So...
`
`03:59
`
`12
`
`MR. HILL: Thank you, Your Honor. And let me just say
`
`03:59
`
`13
`
`that's the point that the Court makes and that Mr. Roberts
`
`03:59
`
`14
`
`makes is a fair point. We certainly hope the defendants will
`
`03:59
`
`15
`
`have all the materials that we're going to need that will go to
`
`03:59
`
`16
`
`the operation of the products. And to his credit, they do not
`
`03:59
`
`17
`
`have our infringement contentions yet.
`
`03:59
`
`18
`
`Your Honor, can I take from your comments that once we get
`
`03:59
`
`19
`
`their invalidity contention disclosures and their production,
`
`03:59
`
`20
`
`if we then do see that there are gaps where third-party
`
`03:59
`
`21
`
`discovery is going to be required -- as I understand it, our
`
`04:00
`
`22
`
`Markman hearing in this case is going to be October 16th. So
`
`04:00
`
`23
`
`we will still be many months before claim construction. Would
`
`04:00
`
`24
`
`the Court entertain us raising the issue at that point if we
`
`04:00
`
`25
`
`thought it ripe?
`
`
`
`15
`
`THE COURT: I will always entertain -- Mr. Hill, you're
`
`one of my favorite people on the planet. I will invite you
`
`to -- I will enjoy hearing from you any time. I would only --
`
`my only caution would be to reach out to defense counsel,
`
`explain to them why you think you need it and why what you have
`
`is inadequate. If they say too bad, which they might, then
`
`just call Josh Yi. And I would recommend you get a copy of the
`
`transcript so that -- you know, and -- so I can look back and
`
`remember what it was I -- and put everything in context.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`04:00
`
`04:00
`
`04:00
`
`04:00
`
`04:00
`
`04:00
`
`04:00
`
`04:00
`
`04:00
`
`04:00
`
`10
`
`But my overarching goal here is to maintain the structure
`
`04:01
`
`11
`
`of the rules the way I have them because I think it's
`
`04:01
`
`12
`
`precariously with everybody. But if you were to convince me --
`
`04:01
`
`13
`
`or if you were to believe and want to try to convince me that
`
`04:01
`
`14
`
`you and your client were being prejudiced, then come back to
`
`04:01
`
`15
`
`the Court any time, and I'll revisit anything.
`
`04:01
`
`16
`
`MR. HILL: Thank you, Your Honor. I appreciate that
`
`04:01
`
`17
`
`opportunity. And rest assured we will fully vet everything and
`
`04:01
`
`18
`
`try to do it through nonjudicial resolution by agreement at
`
`04:01
`
`19
`
`every turn.
`
`04:01
`
`20
`
`THE COURT: I didn't -- I had no doubt that you would.
`
`04:01
`
`21
`
`Is there anything else from the plaintiffs to take up?
`
`04:01
`
`22
`
`MR. HILL: Your Honor, that was the first issue. We had
`
`04:01
`
`23
`
`one additional issue. We understand that the defendants in the
`
`04:01
`
`24
`
`case intend to file motions to transfer venue. Their time for
`
`04:01
`
`25
`
`that has not come yet. But they've --
`
`
`
`16
`
`THE COURT: Okay.
`
`MR. HILL: And I just wanted to flag it for you and to ask
`
`a question because of the colloquy I heard you have on the last
`
`case about venue discovery, Your Honor. Once we see their
`
`motions and we see what's there, it may be that we see also the
`
`need to take venue discovery. And we will talk to the other
`
`side about it, and if we can't agree on it, come to the Court
`
`about it at that time.
`
`What I would was curious about, Your Honor, is, is it your
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`04:01
`
`04:01
`
`04:02
`
`04:02
`
`04:02
`
`04:02
`
`04:02
`
`04:02
`
`04:02
`
`04:02
`
`10
`
`preference that we seek that discovery and then delay the
`
`04:02
`
`11
`
`response to the venue motion until that's resolved and then the
`
`04:02
`
`12
`
`discovery is complete so that you get a fulsome response with
`
`04:02
`
`13
`
`all the evidence, or do you prefer that we respond and then
`
`04:02
`
`14
`
`supplement the record with the discovery later on?
`
`04:02
`
`15
`
`THE COURT: I would prefer -- that's a great question. If
`
`04:02
`
`16
`
`you believe you need discovery, then I'm absolutely okay with
`
`04:02
`
`17
`
`that, because in my opinion, when a defendant prepares a motion
`
`04:02
`
`18
`
`to transfer, they have a much greater insight to what they're
`
`04:03
`
`19
`
`arguing than the plaintiff does. I would -- obviously talk to
`
`04:03
`
`20
`
`opposing counsel. I would assume, me having said that, as long
`
`04:03
`
`21
`
`as what you are seeking is reasonable, they would agree to it.
`
`04:03
`
`22
`
`I would very much prefer -- you know, I don't know -- I think
`
`04:03
`
`23
`
`however you do it -- I can think of a number of ways. I could
`
`04:03
`
`24
`
`see you -- you have their motion. You know what they're saying
`
`04:03
`
`25
`
`your deficiencies are. If you think that you need discovery to
`
`
`
`17
`
`help you make a compelling response, get that done. You
`
`certainly don't need to worry about the deadlines for your
`
`response if you're doing that kind of discovery.
`
`Once you get your response done, you know, file it.
`
`Obviously, the defendants will get a chance to give a reply.
`
`But I would certainly encourage everyone to do it in a manner
`
`that's quick and that -- so that I can get the case -- I'm
`
`sorry. I can get the motion resolved in advance of the
`
`Markman.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`04:03
`
`04:03
`
`04:03
`
`04:03
`
`04:03
`
`04:03
`
`04:04
`
`04:04
`
`04:04
`
`04:04
`
`10
`
`MR. HILL: Yes, sir. Thank you, Your Honor.
`
`04:04
`
`11
`
`THE COURT: Anything else from plaintiff?
`
`04:04
`
`12
`
`MR. HILL: I believe that was our only issues, Your Honor.
`
`04:04
`
`13
`
`THE COURT: And from the defendants?
`
`04:04
`
`14
`
`MR. FULGHUM: Yes, Your Honor. This is Roger Fulghum for
`
`04:04
`
`15
`
`AT&T. We had just a few issues, and we will move quickly.
`
`04:04
`
`16
`
`THE COURT: Okay.
`
`04:04
`
`17
`
`MR. FULGHUM: As the Court -- as the Court noticed,
`
`04:04
`
`18
`
`there's an AT&T case, which is the 712 case, and there's a
`
`04:04
`
`19
`
`DirecTV case, which is the 714 case. We believe those cases
`
`04:04
`
`20
`
`should be consolidated for all purposes, including trial.
`
`04:04
`
`21
`
`We've talked to Broadband iTV about this. I think they're
`
`04:04
`
`22
`
`inclined to go along with that, but I would like to raise that
`
`04:04
`
`23
`
`issue at the hearing to see if we can get to a final resolution
`
`04:04
`
`24
`
`on that point.
`
`04:04
`
`25
`
`THE COURT: Let me ask you this, Mr. Fulghum. Well, let
`
`
`
`18
`
`me start off by saying, if everyone agrees, I'm completely fine
`
`with it. So let me find out from plaintiff.
`
`MR. HILL: Your Honor, Wesley Hill for the plaintiff. We
`
`owe Mr. Fulghum a response on that, Your Honor. We are
`
`inclined toward consolidation. What I've yet to have an
`
`opportunity to do is to fully vet this with my client about
`
`whether that's consolidation for all purposes including trial
`
`or only up until trial. And so I just need to update him on
`
`our position. But that's where --
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`04:04
`
`04:05
`
`04:05
`
`04:05
`
`04:05
`
`04:05
`
`04:05
`
`04:05
`
`04:05
`
`04:05
`
`10
`
`THE COURT: Well, okay. Let me say a couple of things.
`
`04:05
`
`11
`
`For one, they will be consolidated regardless of whether your
`
`04:05
`
`12
`
`client wants it or not up to trial. So that's number one.
`
`04:05
`
`13
`
`With respect to number two, if your client is like any
`
`04:05
`
`14
`
`plaintiff client I had, they -- I think one of the things they
`
`04:05
`
`15
`
`will ask is, does that negatively impact this, for example, in
`
`04:05
`
`16
`
`terms of hours or how we try the case?
`
`04:05
`
`17
`
`I can promise you that I would rather have -- y'all will
`
`04:06
`
`18
`
`get to do what you want, but I would much prefer to have one
`
`04:06
`
`19
`
`trial than two. And so if we wind up having one trial because
`
`04:06
`
`20
`
`they're consolidated, you can -- everyone can assure their
`
`04:06
`
`21
`
`clients that when I'm deciding how much time to give you at
`
`04:06
`
`22
`
`trial, I don't -- I already don't have -- I don't have a cookie
`
`04:06
`
`23
`
`cutter, it's a patent trial, you get X number of hours. What
`
`04:06
`
`24
`
`will happen in terms of how many hours you get will be, at the
`
`04:06
`
`25
`
`pretrial conference I'll talk to you guys, and, you know, the
`
`
`
`19
`
`plaintiff might say -- I'm just pulling a number out. The
`
`plaintiff might say, we'd like 20 hours.
`
`And my response to you would be, okay. Justify that by
`
`telling me who all the -- you know, who all's going to be at,
`
`you know, hearings, what's going to get tried. And if you all
`
`persuade me that it's -- 20 hours per side is the appropriate
`
`amount to give everyone a fair opportunity to try the case,
`
`that's what I'm going to give you.
`
`And so I don't go into this with an already set amount.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`04:06
`
`04:06
`
`04:06
`
`04:06
`
`04:06
`
`04:06
`
`04:07
`
`04:07
`
`04:07
`
`04:07
`
`10
`
`And so -- but it's up to you guys. I would -- I'll tell you I
`
`04:07
`
`11
`
`would much prefer for it to be one trial, but I don't know that
`
`04:07
`
`12
`
`I -- I don't know that I have the power to say that it will be.
`
`04:07
`
`13
`
`I don't know that jurisdictionally I do. Mr. Fulghum, if you
`
`04:07
`
`14
`
`think I do, let me know now, but I'm not sure that it doesn't
`
`04:07
`
`15
`
`have to be something that the plaintiff would consent to.
`
`04:07
`
`16
`
`MR. HILL: You know, Your Honor, if they don't consent, we
`
`04:07
`
`17
`
`would have to file a motion to consolidate. We'd have to
`
`04:07
`
`18
`
`consult the law in the area. The consolidation can occur for
`
`04:07
`
`19
`
`trial, but it's just something we'd have to visit. Hopefully
`
`04:07
`
`20
`
`we'll get past this and be able to move forward.
`
`04:07
`
`21
`
`I have a couple more issues, Judge.
`
`04:07
`
`22
`
`THE COURT: Let me say -- let me say one more thing, which
`
`04:07
`
`23
`
`is, if this helps, Mr. Hill, if I had the discretion, you
`
`04:07
`
`24
`
`should tell your client I would be inclined to consolidate them
`
`04:08
`
`25
`
`if that helps.
`
`
`
`20
`
`MR. HILL: Understood, Your Honor. Understood. Thank
`
`you.
`
`THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Fulghum?
`
`MR. FULGHUM: Yeah. The next thing I'd like to take up is
`
`claim construction briefing, and then we'll end with transfer.
`
`On claim construction briefing, this is a five-patent
`
`case. That means the briefing is 30, 30 patent. And we
`
`reached out to Broadband iTV, and we have an agreement to look
`
`for a modest -- what I would call, Judge, a modest upward
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`04:08
`
`04:08
`
`04:08
`
`04:08
`
`04:08
`
`04:08
`
`04:08
`
`04:08
`
`04:08
`
`04:08
`
`10
`
`adjustment of the page count to 40, 40, 20, and the reason I
`
`04:08
`
`11
`
`raise that is because of the fact that in terms of the accused
`
`04:08
`
`12
`
`products, we're going to be --
`
`04:08
`
`13
`
`THE COURT: Let me cut you off and say you underbid
`
`04:08
`
`14
`
`yourself. I think we already gave away 45 once today. So if
`
`04:08
`
`15
`
`you guys can live with 40, that'll be fine. What you just
`
`04:08
`
`16
`
`suggested will be fine.
`
`04:08
`
`17
`
`MR. FULGHUM: Thank you, Judge.
`
`04:08
`
`18
`
`With regard to transfer, speaking for AT&T and DirecTV, we
`
`04:09
`
`19
`
`are considering a motion to transfer to the Austin Division,
`
`04:09
`
`20
`
`with the same judge of course. That motion is due to be filed
`
`04:09
`
`21
`
`by April 9th. And we're investigating that. I'll let
`
`04:09
`
`22
`
`Mr. Roberts speak with regard to Dish issues.
`
`04:09
`
`23
`
`THE COURT: Okay.
`
`04:09
`
`24
`
`MR. ROBERTS: Yes, Your Honor. We're considering a motion
`
`04:09
`
`25
`
`to transfer to Colorado where Dish is located, but we're
`
`
`
`21
`
`looking intensely at the facts to make sure we think it's very
`
`well supported before raising it.
`
`THE COURT: Okay. Anything else?
`
`MR. FULGHUM: Your Honor, we have a few agreements, minor
`
`disagreements on discovery limits. We're going to postpone
`
`that discussion until later in time. And with any luck we'll
`
`be able to agree, but if not, we'll raise it only if necessary.
`
`THE COURT: Okie dokie. Anything else from defendants?
`
`MR. FULGHUM: Nothing for DirecTV and AT&T, Your Honor.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`04:09
`
`04:09
`
`04:09
`
`04:09
`
`04:09
`
`04:09
`
`04:09
`
`04:09
`
`04:09
`
`04:10
`
`10
`
`Thank you.
`
`04:10
`
`11
`
`MR. ROBERTS: Your Honor, the only --
`
`04:10
`
`12
`
`THE COURT: Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead, please.
`
`04:10
`
`13
`
`MR. ROBERTS: Sorry. This is Mr. Roberts. I only had one
`
`04:10
`
`14
`
`other thing, which is, obviously with the corona virus, there's
`
`04:10
`
`15
`
`a fast-changing situation. Does the Court -- let's say that
`
`04:10
`
`16
`
`things are more serious a month from now than they are now,