Case 2:21-cv-00181-JRG Document 62 Filed 01/04/22 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 2017
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`BILLJCO, LLC
`
`v.
`
`CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
`
`CASE NO: 2:21-cv-00181-JRG
` (Lead Case)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`BILLJCO, LLC
`
`v.
`
`HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE
`COMPANY, ARUBA NETWORKS, LLC
`
`CASE NO: 2:21-cv-00183-JRG
` (Member Case)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`FIRST AMENDED 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 further order of this Court:
`
`Amended
`Date
`
`August 8, 2022
`
`July 11, 2022
`
`Original Date
`*Jury Selection - 9:00 a.m. in Marshall,
`Texas
`* If a juror questionnaire is to be used, an
`editable
`(in Microsoft Word
`format)
`questionnaire shall be jointly submitted to the
`Deputy Clerk in Charge by this date.1
`
`1 The Parties are referred to the Court’s Standing Order Regarding Use of Juror Questionnaires in
`Advance of Voir Dire.
`
`38794068.2
`
`39088261.1
`
`-1 -
`
`Petitioners' Ex. 1024, Page 1 of 8
`Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. et al. v. BillJCo, LLC
`IPR2022-00420
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00181-JRG Document 62 Filed 01/04/22 Page 2 of 8 PageID #: 2018
`
`July 5, 2022
`
`June 27, 2022
`
`June 27, 2022
`
`June 20, 2022
`
`June 13, 2022
`
`June 13, 2022
`
`June 6, 2022
`
`May 23, 2022
`
`*Pretrial Conference - 9:00 a.m. in Marshall,
`Texas before Judge Rodney Gilstrap
`*Notify Court of Agreements Reached
`During Meet and Confer
`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
`*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,
`Shawn
`McRoberts,
`at
`shawn_mcroberts@txed.uscourts.gov.
`
`File Motions in Limine
`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
`
`38794068.2
`
`39088261.1
`
`-2 -
`
`Petitioners' Ex. 1024, Page 2 of 8
`Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. et al. v. BillJCo, LLC
`IPR2022-00420
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00181-JRG Document 62 Filed 01/04/22 Page 3 of 8 PageID #: 2019
`
`May 16, 2022
`
`May 2, 2022
`
`April 25, 2022
`
`*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.
`*File Dispositive Motions
`No dispositive motion may be filed after this
`date without leave of the Court.
`Motions shall comply with Local Rule CV56
`and Local Rule CV-7. Motions to extend
`page
`limits will only be granted
`in
`exceptional
`circumstances. Exceptional
`circumstances require more than agreement
`among parties.
`Deadline to Complete Expert Discovery
`
`April 11, 2022
`
`Serve Disclosures
`Witnesses
`
`for Rebuttal Expert
`
`March 21, 2022
`
`Deadline to Complete Fact Discovery and
`File Motions to Compel Discovery
`
`March 21, 2022
`
`Serve Disclosures for Expert Witnesses by
`the Party with the Burden of Proof
`
`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.” 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.
`
`38794068.2
`
`39088261.1
`
`-3 -
`
`Petitioners' Ex. 1024, Page 3 of 8
`Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. et al. v. BillJCo, LLC
`IPR2022-00420
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00181-JRG Document 62 Filed 01/04/22 Page 4 of 8 PageID #: 2020
`
`March 10, 2022
`
`Comply with P.R. 3-7 (Opinion of Counsel
`Defenses)
`
`February 17, 2022
`
`February 3, 2022
`
`*Claim Construction Hearing - 9:00 a.m. in
`Marshall, Texas before Judge Rodney
`Gilstrap
`*Comply with P.R. 4-5(d) (Joint Claim
`Construction Chart)
`
`January 27, 2022
`
`*Comply with P.R. 4-5(c) (Reply Claim
`Construction Brief)
`
`January 20, 2022
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-5(b) (Responsive Claim
`Construction Brief)
`
`January 21, 2022
`
`January 6, 2022
`
`January 6, 2022
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-5(a) (Opening Claim
`Construction Brief) and Submit Technical
`Tutorials (if any)
`G d
`b it
`t
`h
`t b
`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.
`December 23, 2021 Comply with P.R. 4-4 (Deadline to Complete
`Claim Construction Discovery)
`
`December 16, 2021
`
`File Response to Amended Pleadings
`
`December 2, 2021
`
`*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.
`
`38794068.2
`
`39088261.1
`
`-4 -
`
`Petitioners' Ex. 1024, Page 4 of 8
`Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. et al. v. BillJCo, LLC
`IPR2022-00420
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00181-JRG Document 62 Filed 01/04/22 Page 5 of 8 PageID #: 2021
`
`December 3, 2021
`
`November 26, 2021 Comply with P.R. 4-3
`Construction Statement)
`
`(Joint Claim
`
`November 11, 2021
`
`November 4, 2021
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-2 (Exchange Preliminary
`Claim Constructions)
`
`October 28, 2021
`
`October 14, 2021
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-1 (Exchange Proposed
`Claim Terms)
`
`November 10, 2021 Comply with Standing Order Regarding
`Subject-Matter Eligibility Contentions3
`
`November 10, 2021 Comply with P.R. 3-3 & 3-4 (Invalidity
`Contentions)
`
`October 20, 2021
`
`October 13, 2021
`
`October 6, 2021
`
`*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.
`*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.
`Join Additional Parties
`
`3
`
`http://www.txed.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/judgeFiles/EDTX%20Standing%20Order%20R
`e%20Subject%20Matter%20Eligibility%20Contentions%20.pdf [https://perma.cc/RQN2- YU5P]
`
`38794068.2
`
`39088261.1
`
`-5 -
`
`Petitioners' Ex. 1024, Page 5 of 8
`Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. et al. v. BillJCo, LLC
`IPR2022-00420
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00181-JRG Document 62 Filed 01/04/22 Page 6 of 8 PageID #: 2022
`
`September 15, 2021 Comply with P.R. 3-1 & 3-2 (Infringement
`Contentions)
`
`38794068.2
`
`39088261.1
`
`-6 -
`
`Petitioners' Ex. 1024, Page 6 of 8
`Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. et al. v. BillJCo, LLC
`IPR2022-00420
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00181-JRG Document 62 Filed 01/04/22 Page 7 of 8 PageID #: 2023
`
`(*) 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;
`
`39088261.1
`38793131.1
`
`-7-
`
`Petitioners' Ex. 1024, Page 7 of 8
`Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. et al. v. BillJCo, LLC
`IPR2022-00420
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00181-JRG Document 62 Filed 01/04/22 Page 8 of 8 PageID #: 2024
`
`(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 D CO 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.
`
`39088261.1
`38794068.2
`
`-8 -
`
`.
`
`____________________________________
`RODNEY GILSTRAP
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`So ORDERED and SIGNED this 4th day of January, 2022.
`
`Petitioners' Ex. 1024, Page 8 of 8
`Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. et al. v. BillJCo, LLC
`IPR2022-00420
`
`