Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 1 of 14 PageID 20532
`
` 
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`DALLAS DIVISION
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`
`
`Pursuant to Local Rule 16.4 and Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
`
`Plaintiff MobileMedia Ideas LLC (“MobileMedia”) and Defendants Research in Motion Limited
`
`and Research in Motion Corporation (collectively, “BlackBerry”) hereby submit this Joint
`
`Pretrial Order.
`
`I.
`
`APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL
`
`
`
`
`
`A.
`
`Counsel for MobileMedia
`
`
`
`Richard A. Sayles
`Texas Bar No. 17697500
`dsayles@swtriallaw.com
`Mark D. Strachan
`Texas Bar No. 19351500
`mstrachan@swtriallaw.com
`SAYLES WERBNER, PC
`1201 Elm Street, 44th Floor
`Dallas, TX 75270
`Telephone: (214) 939-8700
`Facsimile: (214) 939-8787
`
`Steven M. Bauer (admitted pro hac vice)
`sbauer@proskauer.com
`Justin J. Daniels (admitted pro hac vice)
`1
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 3:11-cv-02353-N
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`MOBILEMEDIA IDEAS LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED and
`RESEARCH IN MOTION
`CORPORATION,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 2 of 14 PageID 20533
`
` 
`
`jdaniels@proskauer.com
`Safraz W. Ishmael (admitted pro hac vice)
`sishmael@proskauer.com
`John M. Kitchura, Jr. (admitted pro hac vice)
`jkitchura@proskauer.com
`Jinnie Reed (admitted pro hac vice
`jreed@proskauer.com
`PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
`One International Place
`Boston, MA 02110
`Telephone: (617) 526-9600
`Facsimile: (617) 526-9899
`
`Kenneth Rubenstein (admitted pro hac vice)
`krubenstein@proskauer.com
`Baldassare Vinti (admitted pro hac vice)
`bvinti@proskauer.com
`PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
`Eleven Times Square
`New York, NY 10036
`Telephone: (212) 969-3000
`Facsimile: (212) 969-2900
`
`Counsel for BlackBerry
`
`
`
`Daniel Johnson, Jr. (admitted pro hac vice)
`djjohnson@morganlewis.com
`Michael J. Lyons (admitted pro hac vice)
`mlyons@morganlewis.com
`Dion M. Bregman (admitted pro hac vice)
`dbregman@morganlewis.com
`Ahren C. Hsu-Hoffman (admitted pro hac vice)
`ahsu-hoffman@morganlewis.com
`Jason E. Gettleman (admitted pro hac vice)
`jgettleman@morganlewis.com
`Michael F. Carr (admitted pro hac vice)
`mcarr@morganlewis.com
`MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
`2 Palo Alto Square
`3000 El Camino Real, Suite 700
`Palo Alto, CA 94306-2122
`Telephone: (650) 843-4000
`Facsimile: (650) 843-4001
`
`
`2
`
`B.
`
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 3 of 14 PageID 20534
`
` 
`
`II.
`
`
`E. Leon Carter
`Sheria D. Smith
`CARTER STAFFORD ARNETT HAMADA & MOCKLER PLLC
`8150 N. Central Expressway, STE. 1950
`Dallas, TX. 75206
`Tel: 214.550.8160
`Fax: 214.550.8185
`
`SUMMARY OF THE CLAIMS AND DEFENSES OF EACH PARTY
`
`This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35, United
`
`
`1.
`
`States Code. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over all claims and counterclaims in this
`
`action pursuant to at least 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1337, 1338, 2201 and 2202.
`
`2.
`
`Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to at least 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(c)
`
`and 1440(b). This Court has personal jurisdiction over BlackBerry.
`
`3.
`
`MobileMedia filed this action on March 31, 2010, alleging that BlackBerry
`
`infringes twelve MobileMedia patents. MobileMedia filed an Amended Complaint on
`
`November 4, 2011, alleging that BlackBerry infringes an additional four MobileMedia patents.
`
`The Court has previously stayed MobileMedia’s claims based on six of those patents. Pursuant
`
`to the Court’s August 16, 2013 Order (Doc. No. 402), MobileMedia has elected to proceed on
`
`five of the non-stayed patents at the December 2, 2013 trial, namely U.S. Patent Nos. RE 39,231
`
`(“’231 patent”), 5,737,394 (“’394 patent”), 6,070,068 (“’068 patent”), 6,389,301 (“’301 patent”),
`
`and 6,871,048 (“’048 patent”) (collectively, the “Asserted Patents.”).
`
`4.
`
`For the purposes of December 2 trial, MobileMedia alleges that BlackBerry has
`
`infringed, and is infringing, the asserted claims listed below, which will be referred to herein as
`
`the “Asserted Claims,” of the Asserted Patents:
`
`a. Claims 2, 3, 4, and 12 of the ‘231 patent;
`
`b. Claim 19 of the ‘394 patent;
`
`3
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 4 of 14 PageID 20535
`
` 
`
`c. Claims 1 and 10 of the ‘068 patent;
`
`d. Claims 1 and 2 of the ‘301 patent;
`
`e. Claims 1, 2, 4, and 5 of the ‘048 patent.
`
`5.
`
`MobileMedia seeks a judgment that BlackBerry has infringed and willfully
`
`infringed each of the Asserted Patents in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271. MobileMedia also seeks
`
`its damages for BlackBerry’s alleged infringement, enhanced damages, pre-judgment interest,
`
`post-judgment interest, and a permanent injunction. MobileMedia also requests that this case be
`
`declared “exceptional” under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 285, among other statutes, and that
`
`MobileMedia be awarded its costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys’ fees upon prevailing in
`
`this action.
`
`6.
`
`BlackBerry seeks a judgment that it has not infringed and is not infringing, and
`
`that it has not willfully infringed and is not willfully infringing any of the Asserted Patents, and
`
`that the asserted claims of the Asserted Patents are invalid. BlackBerry also seeks a judgment
`
`that MobileMedia’s claims are barred and/or the patents-in-suit are unenforceable because of
`
`estoppel, implied license, waiver, and unclean hands. BlackBerry also requests that this case be
`
`declared “exceptional” under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 285, among other statutes, and that
`
`BlackBerry be awarded its costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys’ fees upon prevailing in this
`
`action.
`
`III.
`
`STATEMENT OF STIPULATED FACTS
`
`7.
`
`As required by Local Rule 16.4(b), attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a Statement of
`
`Stipulated Facts, which will be read to the jury at trial and become a part of the evidentiary
`
`record of this case.
`
`IV.
`
`LIST OF CONTESTED ISSUES OF FACT
`
`4
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 5 of 14 PageID 20536
`
` 
`
`8.
`
`As required by Local Rule 16.4(c), attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is the parties’
`
`listing of the contested issues of fact.
`
`V.
`
`LIST OF CONTESTED ISSUES OF LAW
`
`9.
`
`As required by Local Rule 16.4(d), attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is the parties’
`
`listing of the contested issues of law.
`
`VI. AN ESTIMATE OF THE LENGTH OF TRIAL
`
`10.
`
`As required by Local Rule 16.4(e), the parties estimate that the issues in dispute
`
`should be set to be tried in 10 days, with the time being equally divided between MobileMedia
`
`and BlackBerry.
`
`VII. A LIST OF ANY ADDITIONAL MATTERS THAT MIGHT AID IN THE
`DISPOSITION OF THE CASE
`
`
`
`11. Order of Proof. The parties agree that the presentation of evidence will be as
`
`follows: MobileMedia will present background and its case on infringement and damages;
`
`BlackBerry will answer MobileMedia’s infringement and damages case and present background
`
`and its case on invalidity; MobileMedia will answer BlackBerry’s invalidity case, and respond as
`
`necessary to BlackBerry’s non-infringement and damages case; and BlackBerry will respond as
`
`necessary to MobileMedia’s validity case.
`
`12.
`
`BlackBerry contends that it should be permitted to have the jury render a verdict
`
`on its affirmative defenses of estoppel, implied license, waiver and unclean hands. MobileMedia
`
`disagrees and will brief its arguments in a motion in limine to which BlackBerry will respond.
`
`Should the Court allow the jury to hear evidence and argument on these equitable issues,
`
`BlackBerry will present these issues in its case-in-chief.
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`5
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 6 of 14 PageID 20537
`
` 
`
`13.
`
`Juror Information. The parties may provide each juror an agreed-upon jury
`
`notebook containing the Asserted Patents, corresponding re-issue and/or reexamination
`
`certificates, a chart showing the Court’s claim constructions and the parties’ agreed constructions
`
`for the Asserted Claims, and such other evidence on which the parties agree. The jurors shall be
`
`permitted to take handwritten notes during the presentation by the parties. The jury will be
`
`permitted to bring these notebooks and handwritten notes into the deliberation room.
`
`14. Opening Statements. MobileMedia and BlackBerry agree that they should
`
`receive equal time per side to deliver their opening statements. MobileMedia believes the time
`
`allotted for opening statements should be limited to 45 minutes per side. BlackBerry believes the
`
`time allotted for opening statements should be limited 60 minutes per side.
`
`15.
`
`Verdict Form. The parties will file a proposed verdict form by November 27,
`
`2013.
`
`16.
`
`Evidentiary Stipulations. The following are evidentiary issues to which the
`
`parties have stipulated:
`
`a. The parties agree that neither party will offer any evidence, testimony,
`
`opinions, or arguments regarding settlement communications between the
`
`parties.
`
`b. The parties agree not to refer to MobileMedia as a “troll.”
`
`17.
`
` Accused Products. There are sixteen BlackBerry products accused of
`
`infringement: the BlackBerry Bold 9650, Torch 9800, Curve 8350, Bold 9700, Curve 9330,
`
`Curve 9930, Torch 9810, Curve 9300, Curve 8520, Bold 9900, Storm2 9550, Bold 9780, Tour
`
`9630, Style 9670, Curve 8350i, and Torch 9850 (collectively, the “Accused Products”).  
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`6
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 7 of 14 PageID 20538
`
` 
`
`a. MobileMedia asserts that the following BlackBerry products infringe claims
`
`of the ’068 patent: Bold 9650; Torch 9800; Curve 8530; Bold 9700; Curve
`
`9330; Curve 9930; Torch 9810; Curve 9300; Curve 8520; Bold 9900; Bold
`
`9780; Tour 9630; Style 9670; and Curve 8350i.
`
`b. MobileMedia asserts that the following BlackBerry products infringe claims
`
`of the ’394 patent: Bold 9650; Torch 9800; Curve 8530; Bold 9700; Curve
`
`9330; Curve 9930; Torch 9810; Curve 9300; Curve 8520; Bold 9900; Bold
`
`9780; Tour 9630; Style 9670; and Curve 8350i.
`
`c. MobileMedia asserts that the following BlackBerry products infringe claims
`
`of the ’231 patent: Bold 9650; Torch 9800; Curve 8530; Bold 9700; Curve
`
`9330; Curve 9930; Torch 9810; Curve 9300; Curve 8520; Bold 9900; Storm2
`
`9550; Bold 9780; Tour 9630; Style 9670; Curve 8350i; and Torch 9850.
`
`d. MobileMedia asserts that the following BlackBerry products infringe claims
`
`of the ’301 patent: Bold 9650; Torch 9800; Curve 8530; Bold 9700; Curve
`
`9330; Curve 9930; Torch 9810; Curve 9300; Curve 8520; Bold 9900; Storm2
`
`9550; Bold 9780; Tour 9630; Style 9670; Curve 8350i; and Torch 9850.
`
`e. MobileMedia asserts that the following BlackBerry products infringe claims
`
`of the ’048 patent: Bold 9650; Torch 9800; Curve 8530; Bold 9700; Curve
`
`9330; Curve 9930; Torch 9810; Curve 9300; Curve 8520; Bold 9900; Storm2
`
`9550; Bold 9780; Tour 9630; Style 9670; Curve 8350i; and Torch 9850.
`
`18.
`
`Service of Documents. Service of all documents required under this Order shall
`
`occur by electronic mail or by FTP site or transfer. For the purposes of calculating the time
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`7
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 8 of 14 PageID 20539
`
` 
`
`period for response, such service shall be considered service by hand under the Federal Rules of
`
`Civil Procedure.
`
`19.
`
`The Court’s August 16, 2013 Order. BlackBerry requests, pursuant to the
`
`Court’s August 16, 2013 Order and MobileMedia’s Report Regarding Patents (Dkt. No. 412) that
`
`the Court dismiss, with prejudice, MobileMedia’s infringement claims with respect to U.S.
`
`Patent Nos. 6,446,080, 7,349,012, and 5,490,170, and dismiss without prejudice BlackBerry’s
`
`corresponding counterclaims for non-infringement, invalidity and unenforceability. The parties
`
`are in the process of finalizing a stipulated dismissal of claims relating to U.S. Patent Nos.
`
`5,732,390, and 6,441,828.
`
`20.
`
`Pending Motions. The following opposed motions are pending with the Court1:
`
`(DI 404) Defendants’ Motion for Protective Order
`
`(DI 418) Plaintiff MobileMedia Ideas LLC’s Motion and Memorandum to
`Exclude Expert Testimony of Paul K. Meyer
`
`(DI 420) Defendants’ Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-
`Infringement and/or Invalidity of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,070,068; 6,389,301;
`RE39,231; 5,737,394 and 6,871,048
`
`(DI 422) Plaintiff MobileMedia Ideas LLC’s Motion and Memorandum to
`Compel
`
`(DI 424) Defendants’ Motion to Exclude the Testimony and Expert Report of
`Philip Johnson
`
`
`
`
`2013-08-16
`
`2013-09-03
`
`2013-09-03
`
`2013-09-03
`
`2013-09-03
`
`2013-09-03
`
`(DI 425) Plaintiff MobileMedia Ideas LLC’s Motion for Partial Summary
`Judgment on Defendants’ Affirmative Defenses
`
`(DI 430) Plaintiff MobileMedia Ideas LLC’s Motion to Strike Portions of Dr.
`2013-09-03
`                                                            
`1
`This listing of pending motions do not include the parties motions in limine, filed
`concurrently herewith.
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`8
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 9 of 14 PageID 20540
`
` 
`
`2013-09-03
`
`Inger’s Rebuttal Report and Memorandum in Support
`
`(DI 432) Defendants’ Motion to Exclude the Testimony and Expert Reports
`of Professor Stephen P. Magee
`
`
`
`VIII. WITNESSES
`
`
`21.
`
`Filed concurrently herewith are MobileMedia’s and BlackBerry’s lists of
`
`witnesses that they may call at trial, either in person or by deposition. Each list is broken out
`
`into “will call” and “may call” sections.
`
`22.
`
`For planning purposes, the parties agree to exchange by Monday November 18,
`
`2013, final witness lists (“Final List of Trial Witnesses”). The Final List of Trial Witnesses shall
`
`identify which witnesses the parties expect to testify live at trial, and which witnesses they
`
`expect to testify by deposition. It shall also include which witness the party “expects to call,”
`
`which witnesses it “may call,” and which witnesses it “expects not to call.” The parties Final
`
`List of Trial Witnesses shall not thereafter be changed without good cause.
`
`23.
`
`The following procedures shall apply to the identification of witnesses, exhibits,
`
`and demonstrative exhibits for a party’s case-in-chief prior to their testimony:
`
`a. By no later than 12:00 noon local time on the day before witnesses are
`
`expected to testify, the offering party will provide to the other party via
`
`electronic mail the names and order of the witnesses, including whether they
`
`will testify live or by deposition;
`
`b. At the same time, the offering party will send by electronic mail a list of any
`
`exhibits and all final copies of demonstrative exhibits (subject only to
`
`addressing evidentiary objections or rulings) they intend to use at trial for each
`
`of the witnesses;
`
`9
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 10 of 14 PageID 20541
`
` 
`
`c. By no later than 9:00 pm local time that same day, the party receiving the
`
`demonstratives shall inform the offering party of any objections to such
`
`demonstratives, and shall meet and confer to resolve any objections to
`
`demonstratives shortly thereafter;
`
`d. These notice provisions regarding demonstratives shall not apply to
`
`demonstratives created in the courtroom during testimony or to the
`
`enlargement, highlighting, ballooning, excerption etc. of trial exhibits or
`
`testimony.
`
`24.
`
`By 9:00 am on the day before it intends to rest its case-in-chief, the resting party
`
`shall give the other party notice of its intention to rest so that the parties have an opportunity to
`
`comply with the notice provisions of this Order.
`
`25.
`
`Non-demonstrative exhibits, deposition testimony or other evidence to be
`
`presented as part of opening statements shall be identified no later than 12:00 noon the day prior
`
`to their use at trial.
`
`IX.
`
`EXHIBITS AND DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS
`
`26.
`
`Demonstratives including those used during opening statements, closing
`
`arguments, and direct examination, do not need to be included on the trial exhibit list.
`
`Demonstratives including those used during opening statements, closing arguments, and direct
`
`examination, must be provided to opposing counsel no later than 12:00 noon the day before their
`
`use during trial. This disclosure provision does not apply to demonstrative exhibits used solely
`
`for the purpose of cross examination, or opening statements and closing argument slides that
`
`include solely attorney argument. Demonstrative exhibits that are merely excerpts,
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`10
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 11 of 14 PageID 20542
`
` 
`
`enlargements, or highlights of trial exhibits need not be exchanged, but the underlying trial
`
`exhibits must be identified under the procedure outline in this Order.
`
`27.
`
`Filed concurrently herewith are MobileMedia’s and BlackBerry’s list of exhibits
`
`to be offered at trial.
`
`28.
`
`The parties will raise all objections to exhibits as follows:
`
`a. By no later than November 15, 2013, the parties shall exchange objections to
`
`the exhibit lists filed by the opposing side;
`
`b. By no later than November 22, 2013 at 10:00 a.m., the parties shall in good
`
`faith, narrow their exhibits to be offered at trial, and exchange a good faith
`
`listing of exhibits (noting the other parties objections in the listing) likely to
`
`be offered at trial;
`
`c. By no later than November 25, 2013, the parties shall meet and confer
`
`regarding objections to the narrowed exhibit list. The parties shall then
`
`identify by November 27, 2013 the objections that they will withdraw
`
`following the meet and confer. All remaining objections shall be raised with
`
`the Court at the beginning of the trial day on which the exhibits are to be
`
`offered.
`
`29.
`
`The parties will exchange electronic copies of their respective pre-marked
`
`exhibits in PDF and/or native on or before November 20, 2012. The Plaintiff will mark its
`
`exhibits with a “PX__” prefix and the Defendant will mark its exhibits with a “DX__” prefix.
`
`30.
`
`The following are deemed to be authentic, under the meaning of Federal Rule of
`
`Evidence 901:
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`11
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 12 of 14 PageID 20543
`
` 
`
`a. Any document produced in this case from MobileMedia or BlackBerry’s files
`
`that bears the party’s letterhead, copyright, or corporate logo;
`
`b. Any email produced in this case from MobileMedia or BlackBerry’s files that
`
`on its face appears to have been authored by an employee of any of those
`
`entities;
`
`c. Any BlackBerry source code produced by BlackBerry in this action;
`
`d. Any BlackBerry product produced by BlackBerry in this action.
`
`e. All BlackBerry documentation, sales information, and/or manuals produced at
`MMI-R_00156544 - MMI-R_00225679, MMI-R_00225680 - MMI-
`R_00225708, MMI-R_00225740 - MMI-R_00225775, MMI-R_00226220 -
`MMI-R_00227552, RIM_00257383-397, RIM_01849099-107,
`RIM_03509534-541, RIM_03835337-343, RIM_03065043-211,
`RIM_03065212-216, RIM_03976230-236, RIM_02926732-832,
`RIM_02921256-522, RIM_04133207, RIM_00196610-613, RIM_03325495,
`RIM_02921252-55, RIM_00211622-639, RIM_01839556-571 (redacted
`version), and RIM_00186135-898. 
`
`f. All MobileMedia documentation produced at MMI-R 00231928, MMI-R
`00231929, MMI-R 00231930, MMI-R 00231931, MMI-R 00231932, MMI-R
`00231933, MMI-R_00014229-411, MMI-R_00104262-99, MMI-
`R_00014695-704, MMI-R_00014834-842, MMI-R_00014856-860, MMI-
`R_00014861-872, MMI-R_00014873-877, MMI-R_00014928-937, MMI-
`R_00014938-946, MMI-R_00015087-101, MMI-R_00092619-620, MMI-
`R_00096413-414, MMI-R_00099242, MMI-R_00104167-191, MMI-
`R_00104219, MMI-R_00112072-101, MMI-R_00112102-138, MMI-
`R_00112158-189, MMI-R_00112190-225, MMI-R_00225716-73, MMI-
`R_00228133-136, , MMI-R_00358599-629, MMI-R_00018925-51, MMI-
`R_00014229-67, MMI-R_00014268-411, and MMI-R_00014089-115. 
`
`X.
`
`DESIGNATED PORTIONS OF DEPOSITIONS
`
`31.
`
`Filed concurrently herewith are MobileMedia’s and BlackBerry’s designation of
`
`portions of depositions to be offered at trial.
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`12
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 13 of 14 PageID 20544
`
` 
`
`32.
`
`The listing of a deposition designation or discovery response does not constitute
`
`an admission as to the admissibility of the testimony or discovery response nor is it a waiver of
`
`any applicable objection.
`
`33.
`
`To the extent the Court permits a party to present a witness by deposition at trial
`
`during its case-in-chief, the party offering the testimony will play or read both the designated
`
`portion of the testimony and the opposing party’s counter-designations, omitting (as agreed upon
`
`in advance by the parties) objections or colloquy where appropriate. The time for such
`
`designations shall be allocated to each party accordingly.
`
`
`
`Signed: November _____, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`____________________________
`The Honorable David C. Godbey
`United States District Judge
`
`
`
`
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
`
`13
`
`

`
`Case 3:11-cv-02353-N Document 499 Filed 11/01/13 Page 14 of 14 PageID 20545
`
` 
`
`By: /s/ Daniel Johnson, Jr.
`
`E. Leon Carter
`Sheria D. Smith
`CARTER STAFFORD ARNETT HAMADA
`& MOCKLER PLLC
`8150 N. Central Expressway, STE. 1950
`Dallas, TX. 75206
`Tel: 214.550.8160
`Fax: 214.550.8185
`
`Daniel Johnson, Jr. (admitted pro hac vice)
`djjohnson@morganlewis.com
`Michael J. Lyons (admitted pro hac vice)
`mlyons@morganlewis.com
`Dion M. Bregman (admitted pro hac vice)
`dbregman@morganlewis.com
`Ahren C. Hsu-Hoffman (admitted pro hac
`vice)
`ahsu-hoffman@morganlewis.com
`Jason E. Gettleman (admitted pro hac vice)
`jgettleman@morganlewis.com
`Michael F. Carr (admitted pro hac vice)
`mcarr@morganlewis.com
`MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
`2 Palo Alto Square
`3000 El Camino Real, Suite 700
`Palo Alto, CA 94306-2122
`Telephone: (650) 843-4000
`Facsimile: (650) 843-4001
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
`RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED and
`RESEARCH IN MOTION CORPORATION
`
`
`
`14
`
`Dated: November 1, 2013
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Mark D. Strachan
`
`Richard A. Sayles
`Texas Bar No. 17697500
`dsayles@swtriallaw.com
`Mark D. Strachan
`Texas Bar No. 19351500
`mstrachan@swtriallaw.com
`SAYLES WERBNER, PC
`1201 Elm Street, 44th Floor
`Dallas, TX 75270
`Tel.: (214) 939-8700
`Fax: (214) 939-8787
`
`Steven M. Bauer (admitted pro hac vice)
`sbauer@proskauer.com
`Justin J. Daniels (admitted pro hac vice)
`jdaniels@proskauer.com
`Safraz W. Ishmael (admitted pro hac vice)
`sishmael@proskauer.com
`John M. Kitchura, Jr. (admitted pro hac vice)
`jkitchura@proskauer.com
`Jinnie Reed (pro hac vice motion pending)
`PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
`One International Place
`Boston, MA 02110
`Telephone: (617) 526-9600
`Facsimile: (617) 526-9899
`
`Kenneth Rubenstein (admitted pro hac vice)
`krubenstein@proskauer.com
`Baldassare Vinti (admitted pro hac vice)
`bvinti@proskauer.com
`PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
`Eleven Times Square
`New York, NY 10036
`Telephone: (212) 969-3000
`Facsimile: (212) 969-2900
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`MOBILEMEDIA IDEAS LLC
`
`JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER