`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`HTC CORPORATION
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`LEAD CASE NO. 2:17-cv-514-JRG
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MEMBER CASE NO. 2:17-cv-515-JRG
`
`
`
`
`FIFTH 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:
`
`COURT’S DATE
`
`CHANGE
`
`EVENT
`
`April 1, 2019
`
`Unchanged
`
`March 1, 2019
`
`Unchanged
`
`February 21, 2019 Unchanged
`
`February 18, 2019 February 19, 2019
`
`*Jury Selection – 9:00 a.m. in Marshall, Texas
`before Judge Rodney Gilstrap
`
`*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,
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 171-1 Filed 02/14/19 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 15022
`
`February 18, 2019 February 19, 2019
`
`Responses to Motions in Limine, Updated Exhibit
`Lists, Updated Witness Lists, and Updated
`Deposition Designations
`
`Serve Objections to Rebuttal Pretrial Disclosures
`
`(*) 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
`
`Notice of Mediator: The parties are to jointly file a notice that identifies the agreed
`
`upon mediator or indicates that no agreement was reached. If the parties do not reach an
`agreement, the Court will appoint a mediator. The parties should not file a list of mediators to be
`considered by the Court.
`
`Summary Judgment Motions, Motions to Strike Expert Testimony, and Daubert
`
`Motions: For each motion, the moving party shall provide the Court with two (2) copies of the
`completed briefing (opening motion, response, reply, and if applicable, surreply), excluding
`exhibits, in D-three-ring binders, appropriately tabbed. All documents shall be single-sided and
`must include the CM/ECF header. For expert-related motions, complete digital copies of the
`relevant expert report(s) and accompanying exhibits shall be submitted on a single flash drive.
`These copies shall be delivered as soon as briefing has completed.
`
`Indefiniteness: In lieu of early motions for summary judgment, the parties are directed
`
`to include any arguments related to the issue of indefiniteness in the Markman briefing, subject
`to the local rules’ normal page limits.
`
`Motions for Continuance: The following excuses will not warrant a continuance nor
`
`justify a failure to comply with the discovery deadline:
`
`(a)
`
`(b)
`
`The fact that there are motions for summary judgment or motions to dismiss pending:
`
`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;
`
`
`(c)
`
`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 made the DCO shall
`include a proposed order that lists all 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
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 171-1 Filed 02/14/19 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 15023
`
`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’).”
`
`
`
`