Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 21 Filed 07/19/21 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 462
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
`COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT
`OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION
`
`OCEAN SEMICONDUCTOR LLC,
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`HUAWEI DEVICE USA, INC., HUAWEI
`DEVICE CO., LTD.; and HISILICON
`TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 4:20-cv-991-ALM
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JOINT RULE 26(f) CONFERENCE REPORT
`
`The parties in the above-captioned case have conferred as required by Fed. R. Civ. P.
`
`26(f) and the Court’s Order Governing Proceedings (Dkt. 20 - “Order”) and file this joint report.
`
`The Rule 26(f) conference was held on July 6, 2020. Henrik D. Parker and Alex Chan of
`
`Devlin Law Firm LLC participated on behalf of Ocean Semiconductor, LLC (“Ocean
`
`Semiconductor” or “Plaintiff”). Aaron Davidson of Cole Schotz P.C. participated on behalf of
`
`Huawei Device USA, Inc., Huawei Device Co., Ltd., and HiSilicon Technologies Co., Ltd.
`
`(“Huawei” or “Defendants”).
`
`(1)
`
`Suggested Modifications of the Proposed Deadlines for the Scheduling Order Set
`Out in Appendix B
`
`While in agreement as to many of the proposed case deadlines in these actions, as
`
`reflected in the comparison chart below, the parties have a few disputes that are discussed further
`
`below the chart. To more easily show where the parties are in dispute, the dates in the chart are
`
`written in bold face if either: (1) neither side proposes any modification to the Court’s proposed
`
`1
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 21 Filed 07/19/21 Page 2 of 11 PageID #: 463
`
`
`
`deadline: or (2) the parties agree upon a proposed modification or addition to the Court’s
`
`proposed schedule.
`
`Court’s Proposed
`Deadline
`
`
`Defendants’
`Plaintiff’s
`Proposed
`Proposed
`Deadline
`Deadline
`No later than 21 days before Mgmt. Conf.
`(July 14, 2021)
`August 4, 2021, at 9:00 a.m.
`To be discussed at Mgmt. Conf.
`
`10 days after Mgmt. Conf.
`(August 16, 2021)
`
`5 weeks after Mgmt. Conf.
`(September 8, 2021)
`
`
`No later than 45 days after Mgmt. Conf.
`(September 20, 2021)
`
`7 weeks after Mgmt. Conf.
`(September 22, 2021)
`
`October 6, 2021
`
`
`No later than 65 days
`after Mgmt. Conf.
`(October 8, 2021)
`13 weeks after Mgmt. Conf.
`(November 3, 2021)
`October 15, 2021
`No later than 95 days
`after Mgmt. Conf.
`(November 8, 2021)
`
`16 weeks after Mgmt. Conf.
`(November 24, 2021)
`
`DESCRIPTION
`
`Motions to Transfer
`
`Initial Rule 16 Management Conference
`Mediation.
`The Court will appoint a mediator at the
`Scheduling Conference.
`P.R. 3-1 Disclosure of Asserted Claims and
`Infringement Contentions (and P.R. 3-2
`document production) to be served.
`Join additional parties.
`
`P.R. 3-3 Invalidity Contentions (and P.R. 3-4
`document production) to be served. To the
`extent not already required to be disclosed,
`exchange Mandatory Disclosures on all issues,
`including damages.
`Parties to exchange proposed terms for
`construction and identify any claim element
`governed by 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6 (P.R. 4-1).
`Privilege Logs to be exchanged by parties (or a
`letter to the Court stating that there are no
`disputes as to claims of privileged documents).
`Parties to exchange preliminary proposed
`claim construction and extrinsic evidence
`supporting same. (P.R. 4-2).
`Parties’ Final Amended Pleadings. (A motion
`for leave is required.)
`Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing
`Statement to be filed. (P.R. 4-3). Provide an
`estimate of how many pages are needed to
`brief the disputed claims.
`Respond to Amended Pleadings
`
`2
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 21 Filed 07/19/21 Page 3 of 11 PageID #: 464
`
`
`
`
`No later than 125
`days after Mgmt.
`Conf.
`(December 7, 2021)
`
`October 29, 2021
`
`December 21, 2021
`
`November 12, 2021
`
`November 8, 2021
`
`November 22, 2021
`
`No later than 140
`days after Mgmt.
`Conf.
`(December 22, 2021)
`No later than 2 weeks
`after claim
`construction brief
`(January 5, 2022)
`No later than 7 days
`after response
`(January 12, 2022)
`4 weeks before claim construction hearing
`(December 8, 2021)
`At least 10 days before claim construction
`hearing
`(December 23, 2021)
`January 5, 2022, at 9:00 a.m.
`
`December 1, 2021
`
`Completion date for discovery on claim
`construction. (P.R. 4-4).
`
`Preliminary Election of Asserted Claims
`(Model General Order 13-20).
`Preliminary Election of Asserted Prior Art
`(Model General Order 13-20).
`Opening claim construction brief. (P.R. 4-
`5(a)).
`
`Responsive claim construction brief. (P.R. 4-
`5(b)).
`
`Reply claim construction brief. (P.R. 4-5(c)
`
`Submit technology synopsis/tutorial (both hard
`copy and disk).
`Parties to file joint claim construction and
`chart. (P.R. 4-5(d)). Parties shall work together
`to agree on as many claim terms as possible.
`Proposed Claim Construction hearing at the
`Paul Brown United States Courthouse, 101 E.
`Pecan Street, Sherman, Texas 75090.
`Deadline for Initial Mandatory Disclosure of
`all persons, documents, data compilations and
`tangible things, which are relevant to a claim
`or defense of any party and which has not
`previously been disclosed. This deadline is not
`an extension of earlier deadlines set out in this
`Court’s order or the Patent Rules, nor an
`excuse to delay disclosure of information. It is
`a “catchall” deadline for provision of all
`remaining information which may be relevant
`to a claim or defense of any party at trial.
`Final Election of Asserted Claims (Model
`General Order 13-20).
`
`Parties with burden of proof to designate
`Expert Witnesses other than claims
`construction experts and provide their expert
`witness reports, to include for ALL experts all
`information set out in Rule 26(a)(2)(B).
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`5 weeks after claim construction hearing
`(February 9, 2022)
`
`28 days before service of expert reports by the
`party with the burden of proof
`(February 23, 2022)
`9 weeks after claim construction hearing
`(March 9, 2022)
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 21 Filed 07/19/21 Page 4 of 11 PageID #: 465
`
`
`
`
`11 weeks after claim construction hearing
`(March 23, 2022)
`
`13 weeks after claim construction hearing (and
`no later than 110 days prior to the filing of the
`Joint Final PTO)
`(April 6, 2022)
`
`13 weeks after claim construction hearing
`(April 6, 2022)
`
`5 weeks before final pretrial conference
`(July 11, 2022)
`5 weeks before final pretrial conference
`(July 11, 2022)
`
`30 days before final pretrial conference
`(July 15, 2022)
`
`Comply with P.R. 3-7 (Designation of
`Willfulness Opinions).
`
`Final Election of Asserted Prior Art (Model
`General Order 13-20).
`Parties to Designate Expert Witnesses on
`issues for which the parties do not bear the
`burden of proof, and provide their expert
`witness report, to include for ALL experts all
`information set out in Rule 26(2)(B).
`
`Note: Objections to any expert, including
`Daubert motions, shall be filed within 3 weeks
`after the expert’s Report has been disclosed.
`Such objections and motions are limited to ten
`pages each.
`File Dispositive Motions and any other
`motions that may require a hearing. Regardless
`of how many dispositive motions a party files,
`each party is limited to a total of sixty pages
`for such motions. Each individual motion shall
`comply with Local Rule CV-7.
`
`Responses to motions shall be due in
`accordance with Local Rule CV-7(e).
`Discovery deadline. All discovery must be
`served in time to be completed by this
`deadline.
`Notice of intent to offer certified records.
`
`Counsel and unrepresented parties are each
`responsible for contacting opposing counsel
`and unrepresented parties to determine how
`they will prepare the Joint Final Pretrial Order,
`see www.txed.uscourts.gov, and Proposed Jury
`Instructions and Verdict Form (or Proposed
`Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in
`nonjury cases).
`Motions in limine due.
`
`File Joint Final Pretrial Order. Exchange
`Exhibits and deliver copies to the Court. At
`this date, all that is required to be submitted to
`the Court is a hyperlinked exhibit list on disk
`(2 copies) and no hard copies.
`
`4
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 21 Filed 07/19/21 Page 5 of 11 PageID #: 466
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4 weeks before final pretrial conference
`(July 18, 2022)
`
`2 weeks before final pretrial conference
`(August 1, 2022)
`
`August 15, 2022, at 9:00 a.m.
`
`
`
`9/6/22
`
`TBD
`
`Video Deposition Designation due. Each party
`who proposes to offer a deposition by video
`shall serve on all other parties a disclosure
`identifying the line and page numbers to be
`offered. All other parties will have seven
`calendar days to serve a response with any
`objections and requesting cross examination
`line and page numbers to be included. Counsel
`must consult on any objections and only those
`which cannot be resolved shall be presented to
`the Court. The party who filed the initial Video
`Deposition Designation is responsible for
`preparation of the final edited video in
`accordance with all parties’ designations and
`the Court’s rulings on objections.
`Response to motions in limine due.
`
`File objections to witnesses, deposition
`extracts, and exhibits, listed in pre-trial order.
`(This does not extend the deadline to object to
`expert witnesses.) If numerous objections are
`filed, the Court may set a hearing prior to
`docket call.
`
`File Proposed Jury Instructions/Form of
`Verdict (or Proposed Findings of Fact and
`Conclusions of Law).
`Final Pretrial Conference at the United States
`Courthouse located at 101 E. Pecan Street,
`Sherman, Texas 75090.
`TBD 10:00 a.m. Jury Selection and Trial at the
`Paul Brown United States Courthouse located
`at 101 East Pecan Street in Sherman, Texas.
`
`a) The need for and any specific limits on discovery relating to claim construction,
`including depositions of witnesses, including expert witnesses;
`
`The parties agree that there is no need for any specific limits on discovery relating to
`
`claim construction beyond those set out in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Patent
`
`Rules.
`
`5
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 21 Filed 07/19/21 Page 6 of 11 PageID #: 467
`
`
`
`
`b) The scheduling of a Claim Construction Pre-hearing Conference to be held after
`the Joint Claim Construction and Pre-hearing Statement provided for in P.R.4-3
`has been filed.
`
`The parties do not believe that a Claim Construction Pre-Hearing Conference is
`
`necessary.
`
`(2)
`
`If the parties believe mediation may be appropriate, and the parties can agree upon
`a mediator, the name, address, and phone number of that mediator should be
`stated.
`
`The parties have discussed the value of mediation and believe that mediation could be
`
`beneficial. The parties will continue to confer regarding the selection of the mediator.
`
`(3) What changes, if any, should be made to the limitations on discovery imposed by the
`rules, including the number of depositions and interrogatories.
`
`Ocean Semiconductor does not believe that any modifications should be made to the
`
`normal limitations on discovery as set out in the Orders.
`
`Huawei agrees with Ocean Semiconductor on the limits on interrogatories (45) and
`
`requests for admission (45), but believes that the number of its deposition hours should be
`
`increased given the large number of inventors (fourteen) and anticipated third parties. Huawei
`
`proposes that it be allotted 40 hours of deposition time, including 30(b)(6) and 30(b)(1)
`
`depositions, but not including deposition time for third parties, inventors, or experts.
`
`Ocean Semiconductor disagrees that additional time should be allowed for depositions,
`
`particularly when that additional time does not include the time used for third parties such as the
`
`inventors. There is no reason why additional deposition time is needed for party representatives.
`
`(4)
`
`The identity of persons expected to be deposed.
`
`Ocean Semiconductor discloses the following individuals that may be deposed:
`
`• Richard J. Markle (named inventor of the 651 Patent);
`
`6
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 21 Filed 07/19/21 Page 7 of 11 PageID #: 468
`
`
`
`
`• Elfido Coss, Jr., Qingsu Wang, and Terrence J. Riley (named inventors of the 402
`
`Patent);
`
`• James B. Stirton (named inventor of the 691 Patent);
`
`• Gustavo Mata, Steven C. Nettles, Larry D. Barto, and Yiwei Li (named inventors
`
`of the 305 Patent and the 248 Patent);
`
`• Bryan Choo, Bharath Rangarajan, Bhanwar Singh, and Carmen Morales (named
`
`inventors of the 330 Patent);
`
`• Matthew A. Purdy (named inventor of the 538 Patent);
`
`• Huawei’s Chief Financial Officer, President, and Chief Marketing Officer;
`
`• Various third party toolmakers and foundries; and
`
`• Rule 30(b)(6) representatives of each defendant with respect to various topics
`
`including damages and product design.
`
`Huawei anticipates deposing the following individuals:
`
`• Richard J. Markle (named inventor of the 651 Patent);
`
`• Elfido Coss, Jr., Qingsu Wang, and Terrence J. Riley (named inventors of the 402
`
`Patent);
`
`• James B. Stirton (named inventor of the 691 Patent);
`
`• Gustavo Mata, Steven C. Nettles, Larry D. Barto, and Yiwei Li (named inventors
`
`of the 305 Patent and the 248 Patent);
`
`• Bryan Choo, Bharath Rangarajan, Bhanwar Singh, and Carmen Morales (named
`
`inventors of the 330 Patent);
`
`• Matthew A. Purdy (named inventor of the 538 Patent);
`
`• Additional persons or entities knowledgeable regarding prior art;
`
`7
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 21 Filed 07/19/21 Page 8 of 11 PageID #: 469
`
`
`
`
`(5)
`
`• Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.; and
`
`• Corporate representatives of Ocean Semiconductor.
`
`Any issues relating to disclosure of information (electronically stored and otherwise)
`including the form or forms in which it should be produced and timing of
`production. (See Section E - Mandatory Disclosures.)
`
`The parties will work to agree on a procedure for electronic discovery and production and
`
`submit a proposal to the Court accordingly.
`
`(6)
`
`
`
`Any issues relating to preserving discoverable information, including whether a
`Preservation Order is needed to protect any documents and/or electronically stored
`information.
`
`The parties certify that they have taken reasonable steps to ensure that documents and
`
`things relevant to this action have been (and are continuing to be) preserved. The parties
`
`understand their duties to preserve relevant information and do not believe that a preservation
`
`order is necessary.
`
`(7) Whether any other orders should be entered by the Court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
`P. 26(c), Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b), or Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(c).
`
`The parties disagree about whether the Court’s currently-entered protective order in this
`
`action is sufficient.
`
`Plaintiff’s Position: Ocean Semiconductor believes that the Court’s already-entered
`
`Protective Order is sufficient and appropriate and that it is unnecessary to modify or add to it at
`
`this time as Ocean Semiconductor is not a competitor of any of the Defendants. Should it appear
`
`at a later date, for example, that a source code production protocol is necessary, the parties can
`
`work to agree on such a protocol as a stand-alone pleading.
`
`Defendant’s Position: Huawei believes that a more tailored Protective Order is
`
`necessary in this litigation to adequately protect the highly sensitive nature of the technical
`
`documents related to the accused products, including documents in the possession of non-parties.
`
`8
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 21 Filed 07/19/21 Page 9 of 11 PageID #: 470
`
`
`
`To the extent the parties cannot reach an agreement, Huawei will move for entry of a more
`
`tailored protective order.
`
`(8)
`
`
`(9)
`
`
`
`Estimated trial time.
`
`The parties estimate that the trial will require seven days.
`
`The names of the attorneys who will appear on behalf of the parties at the
`management conference (the appearing attorney must be an attorney of record and
`have full authority to bind the client).
`
`It is expected that Timothy Devlin from Devlin Law Firm LLC will attend the Case
`
`Management Conference on behalf of Ocean Semiconductor.
`
`It is expected that Aaron Davidson of Cole Schotz P.C. will attend the Case Management
`
`Conference on behalf of Huawei.
`
`(10) Any other matters counsel deem appropriate for inclusion in the joint conference
`report.
`
`Privilege Logs.
`
`The parties agree not to log any work product and/or privileged communications from
`
`after the filing of the original Complaint. The parties further agree that plaintiff shall not be
`
`required to prepare a privilege log for pre-suit diligence materials involving outside counsel
`
`absent special circumstances, which can be evaluated on a case-by-case basis; however, a party
`
`is still required to indicate whether they are withholding documents as privileged/work product
`
`as required under the Federal Rules. Such special circumstances include where a party has a
`
`reasonable basis to believe that documents are being improperly withheld because the
`
`privilege/work product may have been waived or because of a misapplication of applicable law.
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 21 Filed 07/19/21 Page 10 of 11 PageID #: 471
`
`
`
`Dated: July 19, 2021
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`/s/ Timothy Devlin
`Timothy Devlin
`tdevlin@devlinlawfirm.com
`Henrik D. Parker
`hparker@devlinlawfirm.com
`Alex Chan
`State Bar No. 24108051
`achan@devlinlawfirm.com
`DEVLIN LAW FIRM LLC
`1526 Gilpin Avenue
`Wilmington, Delaware 19806
`Telephone: (302) 449-9010
`Facsimile: (302) 353-4251
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF,
`OCEAN SEMICONDUCTOR LLC
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Aaron Davidson
`Aaron Davidson
`Texas Bar No. 24007080
`adavidson@coleschotz.com
`Vishal Patel
`Texas Bar No. 24065885
`vpatel@coleschotz.com
`James R. Perkins
`Texas Bar No. 24074881
`perkins@coleschotz.com
`COLE SCHOTZ, P.C.
`901 Main Street, Suite 4120
`Dallas, Texas 75202
`Tel: (469) 557-9390
`Fax: (469) 533-1587
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
`HUAWEI DEVICE USA, INC.,
`HUAWEI DEVICE CO., LTD., AND
`HISILICON TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD.
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 21 Filed 07/19/21 Page 11 of 11 PageID #: 472
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was filed electronically on all
`
`counsel of record through the Court’s electronic filing system on July 19, 2021.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Henrik D. Parker
` Henrik D. Parker
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`