Case 2:20-cv-00123-JRG-RSP Docu me nt 66 Filed 08/05/20 Page 1 of 6 Page iD #: 743
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`ESTECH SYSTEMS, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`TARGET CORPORATION,
`
`C.A. 2:20-cv-00123-JRG
`
`LEAD CASE
`
`PLAINSCAPITAL BANK,
`
`C.A. 2:20-cv-00122-JRG
`
`BOKF, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
`
`C.A. 2:20-cv-00126-JRG
`
`BBVA USA,
`
`WELLS FARGO & COMPANY, AND
`WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,
`
`REGUS MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC,
`
`Defendants.
`
`C.A. 2:20-cv-00127-JRG
`
`C.A. 2:20-cv-00128-JRG
`
`C.A. 2:20-CV-00143 -JRG
`
`DOCKET CONTROL ORDER
`
`In accordance with the scheduling conference held in this case, it is hereby ORDERED
`
`that the following schedule of deadlines is in effect until fmt her order of this Court:
`
`August 2, 2021
`
`* Jwy Selection - 9:00a.m. in Marshall, Texas
`
`July 1, 2021
`
`* If a juror questionnaire is to be used, an editable (in Microsoft
`Word f01mat) questionnaire shall be jointly submitted to the Deputy
`Clerk in Charge by this date. 1
`
`June 29,2021
`
`*Pretrial Conference - 9:00a.m. in Marshall, Texas before
`Judge Roy Payne.
`
`1 The Pruties are referred to the Cowt's Standing Order Regarding Use of Juror Questionnaires in
`Advance of Voir Dire.
`
`1
`
`RingCentral Ex-1008, p. 1
`RingCentral v. Estech
`IPR2021-0057 4
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00123-JRG-RSP Document 66 Filed 08/05/20 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 744
`
`June 18, 2021
`
`*Notify Court of Agreements Reached During Meet and Confer
`
`June 18, 2021
`
`The parties are ordered to meet and confer on any outstanding
`objections or motions in limine. The parties shall advise the Court
`of any agreements reached no later than 1:00 p.m. three (3) business
`days before the pretrial conference.
`
`*File Joint Pretrial Order, Joint Proposed Jury Instructions, Joint
`Proposed Verdict Form, Responses to Motions in Limine, Updated
`Exhibit Lists, Updated Witness Lists, and Updated Deposition
`Designations
`
`June 14, 2021
`
`*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, Shelly
`Holmes, at shelly_holmes@txed.uscourts.gov.
`
`June 7, 2021
`
`File Motions in Limine
`
`June 7, 2021
`
`May 31, 2021
`
`May 17, 2021
`
`May 10, 2021
`
`The parties shall limit their motions in limine to issues that if
`improperly introduced at trial would be so prejudicial that the Court
`could not alleviate the prejudice by giving appropriate instructions
`to the jury.
`
`Serve Objections to Rebuttal Pretrial Disclosures
`
`Serve Objections to Pretrial Disclosures; and Serve Rebuttal Pretrial
`Disclosures
`
`Serve Pretrial Disclosures (Witness List, Deposition Designations,
`and Exhibit List) by the Party with the Burden of Proof
`
`*Response to Dispositive Motions (including Daubert Motions).
`Responses to dispositive motions that were filed prior to the
`dispositive motion deadline, including Daubert Motions, shall be
`due in accordance with Local Rule CV-7(e), not to exceed the
`deadline as set forth in this Docket Control Order.2 Motions for
`Summary Judgment shall comply with Local Rule CV-56.
`
`2 The parties are directed to Local Rule CV-7(d), which provides in part that “[a] party’s failure to
`oppose a motion in the manner prescribed herein creates a presumption that the party does not
`controvert the facts set out by movant and has no evidence to offer in opposition to the motion.”
`2
`
`RingCentral Ex-1008, p. 2
`RingCentral v. Estech
`IPR2021-00574
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00123-JRG-RSP Document 66 Filed 08/05/20 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 745
`
`April 23, 2021
`
`*File Motions to Strike Expert Testimony (including Daubert
`Motions)
`
`No motion to strike expert testimony (including a Daubert motion)
`may be filed after this date without leave of the Court.
`
`April 23, 2021
`
`*File Dispositive Motions
`
`No dispositive motion may be filed after this date without leave of
`the Court.
`
`Motions shall comply with Local Rule CV-56 and Local Rule CV-
`7. Motions to extend page limits will only be granted in exceptional
`circumstances. Exceptional circumstances require more than
`agreement among the parties.
`
`Deadline to Complete Expert Discovery
`
`Serve Disclosures for Rebuttal Expert Witnesses
`
`Deadline to Complete Fact Discovery and File Motions to Compel
`Discovery
`
`Serve Disclosures for Expert Witnesses by the Party with the
`Burden of Proof
`
`April 16, 2021
`
`April 2, 2021
`
`March 12, 2021
`
`March 12, 2021
`
`March 25, 2021
`
`Comply with P.R. 3-7 (Opinion of Counsel Defenses)
`
`March 4, 2021
`
`*Claim Construction Hearing – 9:00 a.m. in Marshall, Texas
`before Judge Roy Payne
`
`February 18, 2021
`
`*Comply with P.R. 4-5(d) (Joint Claim Construction Chart)
`
`February 11, 2021
`
`*Comply with P.R. 4-5(c) (Reply Claim Construction Brief)
`
`February 4, 2021
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-5(b) (Responsive Claim Construction Brief)
`
`January 21, 2021
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-5(a) (Opening Claim Construction Brief) and
`Submit Technical Tutorials (if any)
`
`Good cause must be shown to submit technical tutorials after the
`deadline to comply with P.R. 4-5(a).
`
`If the deadline under Local Rule CV 7(e) exceeds the deadline for Response to Dispositive
`Motions, the deadline for Response to Dispositive Motions controls.
`3
`
`RingCentral Ex-1008, p. 3
`RingCentral v. Estech
`IPR2021-00574
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00123-JRG-RSP Document 66 Filed 08/05/20 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 746
`
`January 21, 2021
`
`Deadline to Substantially Complete Document Production and
`Exchange Privilege Logs
`
`Counsel are expected to make good faith efforts to produce all
`required documents as soon as they are available and not wait until
`the substantial completion deadline.
`
`January 7, 2021
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-4 (Deadline to Complete Claim Construction
`Discovery)
`
`January 4, 2021
`
`File Response to Amended Pleadings
`
`December 18, 2020
`
`*File Amended Pleadings
`
`It is not necessary to seek leave of Court to amend pleadings prior
`to this deadline unless the amendment seeks to assert additional
`patents.
`
`December 11, 2020
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-3 (Joint Claim Construction Statement)
`
`November 20, 2020
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-2 (Exchange Preliminary Claim Constructions)
`
`October 29, 2020
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-1 (Exchange Proposed Claim Terms)
`
`August 31, 2020
`
`Comply with Standing Order Regarding Subject-Matter Eligibility
`Contentions3
`
`August 31, 2020
`
`Comply with P.R. 3-3 & 3-4 (Invalidity Contentions)
`
`August 10, 2020
`
`*File Proposed Protective Order and Comply with Paragraphs 1 & 3
`of the Discovery Order (Initial and Additional Disclosures)
`
`The Proposed Protective Order shall be filed as a separate motion
`with the caption indicating whether or not the proposed order is
`opposed in any part.
`
`August 4, 2020
`
`*File Proposed Docket Control Order and Proposed Discovery
`Order
`
`The Proposed Docket Control Order and Proposed Discovery Order
`shall be filed as separate motions with the caption indicating
`whether or not the proposed order is opposed in any part.
`
`3 http://www.txed.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/judgeFiles/EDTX%20Standing%20Order%20
`Re%20Subject%20Matter%20Eligibility%20Contentions%20.pdf
`[https://perma.cc/RQN2-
`YU5P]
`
`4
`
`RingCentral Ex-1008, p. 4
`RingCentral v. Estech
`IPR2021-00574
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00123-JRG-RSP Document 66 Filed 08/05/20 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 747
`
`July 27, 2020
`
`July 6, 2020
`
`Join Additional Parties
`
`Comply with P.R. 3-1 & 3-2 (Infringement Contentions)
`
`(*) indicates a deadline that cannot be changed without showing good cause. Good cause is
`not shown merely by indicating that the parties agree that the deadline should be changed.
`
`ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
`
`Mediation: While certain cases may benefit from mediation, such may not be appropriate
`for every case. The Court finds that the Parties are best suited to evaluate whether mediation will
`benefit the case after the issuance of the Court’s claim construction order. Accordingly, the Court
`ORDERS the Parties to file a Joint Notice indicating whether the case should be referred for
`mediation within fourteen days of the issuance of the Court’s claim construction order. As a
`part of such Joint Notice, the Parties should indicate whether they have a mutually agreeable
`mediator for the Court to consider. If the Parties disagree about whether mediation is appropriate,
`the Parties should set forth a brief statement of their competing positions in the Joint Notice.
`
`Summary Judgment Motions, Motions to Strike Expert Testimony, and Daubert
`Motions: For each motion, the moving party shall provide the Court with two (2) hard copies of
`the completed briefing (opening motion, response, reply, and if applicable, sur-reply), excluding
`exhibits, in D-three-ring binders, appropriately tabbed. All documents shall be single-sided and
`must include the CM/ECF header. These copies shall be delivered to the Court within three (3)
`business days after briefing has completed. For expert-related motions, complete digital copies of
`the relevant expert report(s) and accompanying exhibits shall be submitted on a single flash drive
`to the Court. Complete digital copies of the expert report(s) shall be delivered to the Court no later
`than the dispositive motion deadline.
`
`Indefiniteness: In lieu of early motions for summary judgment, the parties are directed to
`include any arguments related to the issue of indefiniteness in their Markman briefing, subject to
`the local rules’ normal page limits.
`
`Lead Counsel: The Parties are directed to Local Rule CV-11(a)(1), which provides that
`“[o]n the first appearance through counsel, each party shall designate a lead attorney on the
`pleadings or otherwise.” Additionally, once designated, a party’s lead attorney may only be
`changed by the filing of a Motion to Change Lead Counsel and thereafter obtaining from the Court
`an Order granting leave to designate different lead counsel.
`
`Motions for Continuance: The following excuses will not warrant a continuance nor
`justify a failure to comply with the discovery deadline:
`
`(a)
`
`The fact that there are motions for summary judgment or motions to dismiss pending;
`
`5
`
`RingCentral Ex-1008, p. 5
`RingCentral v. Estech
`IPR2021-00574
`
`

`

`Case 2:20-cv-00123-JRG-RSP Document 66 Filed 08/05/20 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 748
`
`(b)
`
`(c)
`
`The fact that one or more of the attorneys is set for trial in another court on the same day,
`unless the other setting was made prior to the date of this order or was made as a special
`provision for the parties in the other case;
`
`The failure to complete discovery prior to trial, unless the parties can demonstrate that it
`was impossible to complete discovery despite their good faith effort to do so.
`
`Amendments to the Docket Control Order (“DCO”): Any motion to alter any date on
`the DCO shall take the form of a motion to amend the DCO. The motion to amend the DCO shall
`include a proposed order that lists all of the remaining dates in one column (as above) and the
`proposed changes to each date in an additional adjacent column (if there is no change for a date
`the proposed date column should remain blank or indicate that it is unchanged). In other words,
`the DCO in the proposed order should be complete such that one can clearly see all the remaining
`deadlines and the changes, if any, to those deadlines, rather than needing to also refer to an earlier
`version of the DCO.
`
`Proposed DCO: The Parties’ Proposed DCO should also follow the format described
`above under “Amendments to the Docket Control Order (‘DCO’).”
`
`Joint Pretrial Order: In the contentions of the Parties included in the Joint Pretrial Order,
`the Plaintiff shall specify all allegedly infringed claims that will be asserted at trial. The Plaintiff
`shall also specify the nature of each theory of infringement, including under which subsections of
`35 U.S.C. § 271 it alleges infringement, and whether the Plaintiff alleges divided infringement or
`infringement under the doctrine of equivalents. Each Defendant shall indicate the nature of each
`theory of invalidity, including invalidity for anticipation, obviousness, subject-matter eligibility,
`written description, enablement, or any other basis for invalidity. The Defendant shall also specify
`each prior art reference or combination of references upon which the Defendant shall rely at trial,
`with respect to each theory of invalidity. The contentions of the Parties may not be amended,
`supplemented, or dropped without leave of the Court based upon a showing of good cause.
`
`6
`
`RingCentral Ex-1008, p. 6
`RingCentral v. Estech
`IPR2021-00574
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SIGNED this 5th day of August, 2020.
`
`