1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 1 of 13
`
`THE HONORABLE JAMES L. ROBART
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
`AT SEATTLE
`
`CYWEE GROUP LTD.,
`
`CASE NO.: 2:17-cv-00932-JLR
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO
`AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER
`
`NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR:
`APRIL 13, 2018
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`HTC CORPORATION, and HTC AMERICA,
`INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`HTC CORPORATION, and HTC AMERICA,
`INC.,
`
`Third-Party Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`STMICROELECTRONICS N.V.,
`STMICROELECTRONICS, INC., and CYWEE
`MOTION GROUP LTD.,
`
`Third-Party Defendants.
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO AMEND
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 2 of 13
`
`Pursuant to Rule 16(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and LCR 16(b)(5),
`
`Defendants HTC Corporation (“HTC Corp.”) and HTC America, Inc. (“HTC America”)
`
`(collectively, “HTC”) hereby move the Court to amend the case schedule provided in the Minute
`
`Order Setting Trial Dates and Related Dates (Dkt. # 42) (“Scheduling Order”). Specifically,
`
`HTC requests that the Court extend all case deadlines prior to the deadline to file dispositive
`
`motions in order to account for the addition of third-party defendants to this action following
`
`issuance of the Scheduling Order, (see Dkt. # 43), and to afford all third-party defendants the
`
`opportunity to participate in claim construction proceedings.
`
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND
`The Court issued its Scheduling Order in this case on December 14, 2017. (See Dkt.
`
`# 42.) At the time, the only parties in the case were HTC and Plaintiff CyWee Group Ltd.
`
`(“CyWee”). On January 11, 2018, however, HTC filed a Third-Party Complaint against
`
`STMicroelectronics N.V. (“STM N.V.”), STMicroelectronics, Inc. (“STM, Inc.”), and CyWee
`
`Motion Group Ltd. (“CyWee Motion”). (See Dkt. # 43.) In conjunction with its Third-Party
`
`Complaint, HTC filed three Praecipes to Issue Summons: one as to STM N.V., a corporation
`
`organized and existing under the laws of the Netherlands, (see Dkt. # 44); one as to STM, Inc.,
`
`a Delaware corporation with a registered agent in the State of Washington, (see Dkt. # 45); and
`
`one as to CyWee Motion, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Taiwan, (see
`
`Dkt. # 46). On January 16, 2018, the Clerk of Court issued the aforementioned summonses.
`
`(See Dkt. # 47.) HTC served STM, Inc. with the Third-Party Complaint and corresponding
`
`summons on January 19, 2018. (See Dkt. # 50.)
`
`Thus far, however, HTC has been unable to effectuate service with respect to STM N.V.
`and CyWee Motion. (See Yoon Decl.1 at ¶ 8.) Because STM, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary
`of STM N.V., (see Dkt. # 53), and CyWee is an affiliate of CyWee Motion, (see Yoon Decl. at
`
`¶ 4), counsel for HTC initially met and conferred with counsel for STM, Inc. and counsel for
`
`1 “Yoon Decl.” refers to the concurrently filed Declaration of James C. Yoon.
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO AMEND
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`1
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 3 of 13
`
`CyWee regarding acceptance of service on behalf of STM N.V. and CyWee Motion,
`
`respectively, (see id. at ¶¶ 4-5). Specifically, counsel for HTC met and conferred with counsel
`
`for STM, Inc. on February 14, 2018. (See id. at ¶ 5.) And counsel for HTC met and conferred
`
`over several conversations and email communications with counsel for CyWee starting on
`
`January 12, 2018. (See id. at ¶ 4.) Neither STM, Inc. nor CyWee, however, agreed to accept
`
`service on behalf of its affiliate. (See id. at ¶¶ 4-5.)
`
`After its efforts to informally negotiate acceptance or waiver of service failed, HTC
`
`retained the services of TransPerfect Legal Solutions (“TransPerfect”), a firm that specializes in
`
`translation of documents and foreign service of process, on March 7, 2018 . (See id. at ¶ 6.)
`
`TransPerfect subsequently enlisted the assistance of Celeste Ingalls, a specialist in the service of
`foreign process. (See Ingalls N. Decl.2 at lines 1-3, ¶¶ 1-2; Ingalls T. Decl.3 at lines 1-3, ¶¶ 1-
`2.) As Netherlands is a signatory to the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and
`
`Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, Done at The Hague, November 15,
`
`1965 (“the Hague Service Convention”), (see Ingalls N. Decl. at ¶ 3), Ms. Ingalls recommended
`
`that service as to STM N.V. be completed in accordance with the Hague Service Convention,
`
`(see id. at ¶¶ 4-11). This process generally takes three to four months to complete, but can
`
`occasionally exceed six months. (See id. at ¶ 12.) Taiwan, on the other hand, is not a signatory
`
`to the Hague Service Convention. (See Ingalls T. Decl. at ¶ 3.) As such, Ms. Ingalls
`
`recommended that service as to CyWee Motion be completed via letter rogatory service, (see
`
`id. at ¶¶ 4-12), which generally takes a minimum of six months to complete, but could exceed a
`
`year, (see id. at ¶ 13). Ms. Ingalls commenced with the proper procedures to properly and
`
`formally effect service of process on STM N.V. and CyWee Motion on March 20, 2018. (See
`
`Ingalls N. Decl. at ¶ 3; Ingalls T. Decl. at ¶ 3.)
`
`2 “Ingalls N. Decl.” refers to the concurrently filed Declaration of Celeste Ingalls Regarding
`Service of Process in the Netherlands.
`3 “Ingalls T. Decl.” refers to the concurrently filed Declaration of Celeste Ingalls Regarding
`Service of Process in Taiwan.
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO AMEND
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`2
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 4 of 13
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`In light of the above, it is likely4 that STM N.V. and CyWee Motion will not be served
`until the deadline for service of summons and third-party complaint has passed and claim
`
`construction proceedings are either well underway or complete. (Compare Ingalls N. Decl. at
`
`¶ 12 (estimating service time of three to four months in the Netherlands), and Ingalls T. Decl. at
`
`¶ 13 (estimating service time of at least six months in Taiwan), with Dkt. # 42.) Accordingly,
`
`HTC requests that the Court extend HTC’s deadline for service of summons and third-party
`complaint and delay claim construction proceedings to the extent possible,5 so that all third-party
`defendants—who may be bound by the Court’s determinations—have the opportunity to
`
`participate. Specifically, HTC proposes the following schedule:
`
`Event
`HTC’s Deadline for Service of Summons
`and Third-Party Complaint
`Joint Claim Chart and Prehearing Statement
`
`Current Deadline
`April 11, 2018
`
`Proposal
`October 11, 2018
`
`April 25, 2018
`
`July 27, 2018
`
`Opening Claim Construction Briefs
`
`May 18, 2018
`
`August 2, 2018
`
`Responsive Claim Construction Briefs
`
`June 1, 2018
`
`August 16, 2018
`
`Markman Hearing (9:00 AM)
`
`July 13, 2018
`
`September 21, 2018
`
`(Subject to the
`Court’s availability)
`
`Initial Expert Reports
`
`August 24, 2018
`
`October 23, 2018
`
`4 On March 16, 2018, HTC sent letters to STM N.V. and CyWee Motion requesting that they
`waive service pursuant to Rule 4(d)(1)(D) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (See Yoon
`Decl. at ¶¶ 9-10.) To date, however, HTC has received no indication that either entity is inclined
`to do so. (See id.)
`5 HTC is mindful of this Court’s decisions reflecting its preference for (1) a 35-day time period
`between the deadline for completing claim construction briefing and the Markman hearing, see
`Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., No. 2:10-cv-00230-JLR, slip op. at 2 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 29,
`2011) (Robart, J.), (2) a discovery cut-off that precedes the deadline for filing dispositive
`motions, so that the record is complete when the Court considers such motions, see Hawkins v.
`United States, No. C16-0498JLR, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79800, at *3-4 (W.D. Wash. May 24,
`2017) (Robart, J.) (extending the discovery cut-off date to June 20, 2017, in view of the June 27,
`2017 deadline for filing dispositive motions), and (3) a 105-day time period between the deadline
`for filing dispositive motions and the trial date, see Pac. Bioscience Labs., Inc. v. Nutra Luxe
`MD, LLC, No. 2:10-cv-01823-JLR, slip op. at 2 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 2, 2012) (Robart, J.).
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO AMEND
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`3
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 5 of 13
`
`Event
`Rebuttal Expert Reports
`
`Current Deadline
`September 21, 2018
`
`Proposal
`November 8, 2018
`
`Deadline to Amend Pleadings
`
`September 26, 2018
`
`November 13, 2018
`
`Deadline to Note Discovery Motions
`
`October 5, 2018
`
`November 16, 2018
`
`[No later than the
`Friday before
`discovery closes]
`
`[No later than the
`Friday before
`discovery closes]
`
`Close of Discovery
`
`October 12, 2018
`
`November 19, 2018
`
`Deadline to File Dispositive Motions
`
`November 20, 2018
`
`November 20, 2018
`
`Deadline to Note Dispositive Motions
`
`December 14, 2018
`
`December 14, 2018
`
`Deadline to hold Settlement Conference per
`CR 39.1(c)(2)
`
`[No later than fourth
`Friday after filing]
`
`[No later than fourth
`Friday after filing]
`
`December 21, 2018
`
`December 21, 2018
`
`Deadline to File Motions in Limine
`
`February 22, 2019
`
`February 22, 2019
`
`Deadline to Note Motions in Limine
`
`March 8, 2019
`
`March 8, 2019
`
`[No later than second
`Friday after filing]
`
`[No later than second
`Friday after filing]
`
`Pretrial Order
`
`March 7, 2019
`
`March 7, 2019
`
`Pretrial Conference (2:00 PM)
`
`March 11, 2019
`
`March 11, 2019
`
`Trial Briefs, Proposed Voir Dire Questions
`and Jury Instructions
`
`March 18, 2019
`
`March 18, 2019
`
`Trial (7-8 days)
`
`March 25, 2019
`
`March 25, 2019
`
`II.
`
`LEGAL STANDARD
`
`Under Rule 16(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “[a] schedule may be
`
`modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” See also LCR 16(b)(5). “Rule
`
`16(b)’s ‘good cause’ standard primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking the
`
`amendment.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). In other
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO AMEND
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`4
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 6 of 13
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`words, “[t]he district court may modify the pretrial schedule if it cannot reasonably be met
`
`despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.” Id. (internal quotation and citations
`
`omitted). Finally, “[a]lthough the existence or degree of prejudice to the party opposing the
`
`modification might supply additional reasons to deny a motion, the focus of the inquiry is upon
`
`the moving party's reasons for seeking modification.” Id. (citation omitted).
`
`III.
`
`ARGUMENT
`
`In accordance with the good cause standard of Rule 16, HTC has diligently pursued
`
`informally negotiating acceptance or waiver of service for third-party defendants STM N.V. and
`
`CyWee Motion. Despite its efforts, however, the service process may not be completed for
`
`several months. Accordingly, there is good cause for the requested relief, which HTC diligently
`
`requested. Furthermore, any prejudice that CyWee and STM, Inc. might experience if HTC’s
`
`proposed schedule is adopted—a subordinate consideration in the evaluation of good cause in the
`
`first place—would be minimal.
`1.
`There Is Good Cause to Amend the Scheduling Order
`As the Ninth Circuit has made clear, “Rule 16(b)’s ‘good cause’ standard primarily
`
`considers the diligence of the party seeking the amendment.” Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609. HTC
`
`has diligently sought to serve the foreign third-party defendants in this case. The Clerk of Court
`
`issued summonses as to third-party defendants STM, Inc., STM N.V., and CyWee Motion on
`
`January 16, 2018. (See Dkt. # 47.) On January 19, 2018, merely three days later, HTC served
`
`STM, Inc. with the Third-Party Complaint and corresponding summons. (See Dkt. # 50.) The
`
`summons was returned executed and entered by the Court on January 29, 2018. (See id.) During
`
`this time, HTC initiated meet and confer efforts to investigate the possibility of CyWee accepting
`
`service on behalf of its affiliate, CyWee Motion. (See Yoon Decl. at ¶ 4.) And once STM, Inc.
`
`was properly a party to the case, HTC promptly initiated meet and confer efforts to investigate
`
`the possibility of STM, Inc. accepting service on behalf its affiliate, STM N.V. (See id. at ¶ 5;
`
`Dkt. # 53.) When informal negotiations failed, (see Yoon Decl. at ¶¶ 4-5), HTC sought the
`
`assistance of a company that specialized in providing foreign service of process, and ultimately
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO AMEND
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`5
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 7 of 13
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`enlisted the services of TransPerfect on March 7, 2018, (see id. at ¶ 6). On March 20, 2018,
`
`TransPerfect instructed Ms. Ingalls to initiate the proper procedures to effect service of process
`
`upon CyWee Motion and STM N.V. (See Ingalls N. Decl. at ¶ 2; Ingalls T. Decl. at ¶ 2.)
`
`Pursuant to Ms. Ingalls’ recommendations regarding service of CyWee Motion, (see Ingalls T.
`
`Decl. at ¶¶ 6-12), HTC filed a Motion for Issuance of a Request for International Judicial
`
`Assistance (Letter Rogatory) on March 29, 2018, (see Dkt. # 67). And with respect to STM
`
`N.V., HTC expects that the requisite service documents will be ready to send to the appropriate
`
`authority in the Netherlands, in accordance with the Hague Service Convention, on March 30,
`
`2018. (See Ingalls N. Decl. ¶ 11.) In short, although effectuating foreign service is a multi-step
`
`process, (see id. at ¶¶ 2, 8-11; Ingalls T. Decl. at ¶¶ 2, 6-12), HTC has diligently progressed
`
`through those steps to date.
`
`HTC was also diligent in filing the instant motion. To wit, it filed the instant motion one
`
`day after satisfying its latest obligation to effectuate service on CyWee Motion in Taiwan, (see
`
`Dkt. # 67), and on the same day that it anticipates sending the requisite service documents to the
`
`appropriate authority in the Netherlands, in furtherance of its efforts to serve STM N.V., (see
`
`Ingalls N. Decl. ¶ 11).
`
`In light of HTC’s diligence, there is good cause to amend the Scheduling Order as HTC
`
`has proposed. If the schedule is not so amended, it is likely that the lengthy process
`
`requirements for foreign service will prevent HTC from serving STM N.V. and CyWee Motion
`
`until the deadline for service of summons and third-party complaint has passed. Furthermore,
`
`third-party defendants STM N.V. and CyWee Motion would likely be deprived of the
`
`opportunity to participate in claim construction proceedings. Courts in this Circuit have found
`
`good cause in similar circumstances. See U.S. Ethernet Innovations, LLC v. Acer, Inc., No.
`
`C 10-3724 CW, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113551, at *31 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2013) (“Allowing [the
`
`plaintiff] to assert infringement contentions against [the third-party defendant] now would be
`
`unduly prejudicial because, among other things, [the third-party defendant] would be deprived of
`
`the opportunity to participate in the claim construction proceedings that have already taken place
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO AMEND
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`6
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 8 of 13
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`and the dispositive summary judgment that is now pending.”); Victor Co. of Japan, Ltd. v.
`
`Quanta Comput., Inc., No. C 06-04222 WHA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21263, at *6-7 (N.D. Cal.
`
`Mar. 15, 2007) (“[The third-party defendant] has demonstrated that it cannot, despite diligently
`
`pursuing its defenses, sufficiently develop non-infringement and invalidity positions to exchange
`
`preliminary claim constructions by the end of this month. . . . Accordingly, [the third-party
`
`defendant’s] proposed schedule will be adopted for dates up to and including the claim-
`
`construction hearing.”); cf. Estate of Powell v. Barnes, No. C16-0352JLR, 2017 U.S. Dist.
`
`LEXIS 9923, at *5 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 24, 2017) (Robart, J.) (quoting McFall v. Stacy & Witbeck,
`
`Inc., No. 14-CV-04150-JSC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64303, at *10-11 (N.D. Cal. May 16, 2016))
`
`(“Given that the [c]ourt has granted [the parties’ stipulated] motion to amend the complaint to
`
`add . . . new part[ies] . . . , there is necessarily good cause to amend the scheduling order with
`
`respect to the case management deadlines.”).
`2.
`CyWee and STM, Inc. Will Not Be Prejudiced by HTC’s Proposed Schedule
`
`The Ninth Circuit has made clear that prejudice to non-moving parties is a secondary
`
`consideration in evaluating whether good cause exists to modify a case schedule. See Johnson,
`
`975 F.2d at 609 (“Although the existence or degree of prejudice to the party opposing the
`
`modification might supply additional reasons to deny a motion, the focus of the inquiry is upon
`
`the moving party’s reasons for seeking modification.”). As HTC has diligently sought to serve
`
`STM N.V. and CyWee Motion, was diligent in requesting an amendment to the Scheduling
`
`Order, and had good reason for doing so, these factors outweigh any potential prejudice to
`
`CyWee and STM, Inc., and good cause exists to amend the Scheduling Order.
`
`Even if prejudice alone were enough to preclude a finding of good cause—it is not—
`
`CyWee and STM, Inc. will not be unfairly prejudiced by the schedule the HTC has proposed. As
`
`an initial matter, the proposed schedule would apply equally to HTC. Furthermore, HTC has not
`
`proposed to extend the trial date, nor any dates following the close of discovery. Most
`
`importantly, however, HTC’s proposal to amend the Scheduling Order is simply a request for
`
`sufficient time to serve requisite parties, and an attempt to afford as many parties as possible the
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO AMEND
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`7
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 9 of 13
`
`opportunity to participate in claim construction proceedings, which may have binding
`
`consequences on those very parties. As such, prejudice considerations, insofar as they are
`
`relevant to the evaluation of good cause, weigh in favor of adopting the schedule that HTC has
`
`proposed.
`
`IV.
`
`CONCLUSION
`For the foregoing reasons, HTC respectfully requests that the Court amend its Scheduling
`
`Order in the manner that HTC has proposed.
`Dated: March 30, 2018
`
` s/ Gregory L. Watts
`Gregory L. Watts, WSBA #43995
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`Professional Corporation
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5100
`Seattle, WA 98104-7036
`Telephone: (206) 883-2500
`Facsimile: (206) 883-2699
`Email: gwatts@wsgr.com
`
`James C. Yoon, CA Bar #177155 (pro hac vice)
`Ryan R. Smith, CA Bar #229323(pro hac vice)
`Albert Shih, CA Bar # 251726 (pro hac vice)
`Jamie Y. Otto, CA Bar # 295099 (pro hac vice)
`Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
`Professional Corporation
`650 Page Mill Road
`Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
`Telephone: (650) 493-9300
`Facsimile: (650) 565-5100
`Email: jyoon@wsgr.com
`
`
`rsmith@wsgr.com
`
`
`ashih@wsgr.com
`
`
`jotto@wsgr.com
`
`Ty W. Callahan, CA Bar # 312548 (pro hac vice)
`Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
`Professional Corporation
`633 West Fifth Street, Suite 1550
`Los Angeles, CA 90071-2027
`Telephone: (323) 210-2900
`Facsimile: (866) 974-7329
`Email: tcallahan@wsgr.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs
`HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc.
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO AMEND
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`8
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 10 of 13
`
`THE HONORABLE JAMES L. ROBART
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
`AT SEATTLE
`
`CYWEE GROUP LTD.,
`
` CASE NO.: 2:17-cv-00932-JLR
`
`[PROPOSED] AMENDMENT TO
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`HTC CORPORATION, and HTC AMERICA,
`INC.,
`
`Defendants,
`
`HTC CORPORATION, and HTC AMERICA,
`INC.,
`
`Third-Party Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`STMICROELECTRONICS N.V.,
`STMICROELECTRONICS, INC., and CYWEE
`MOTION GROUP LTD.,
`
`Third-Party Defendants.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`[PROPOSED] AMENDMENT TO SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 11 of 13
`
`This matter comes before the Court on Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs HTC
`
`Corporation and HTC America, Inc.’s Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order as provided in the
`
`December 14, 2017 Minute Order Setting Trial Dates and Related Dates (D.I. 42) (“Scheduling
`
`Order”). This Court, having reviewed the relevant motions, pleadings, and papers on file, hereby
`
`enters the following ORDER:
`
`Good cause appearing, Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend the
`
`Scheduling Order is GRANTED in its entirety. Accordingly, the Court hereby adopts the
`
`following amended case schedule:
`
`Event
`HTC’s Deadline for Service of Summons and
`Third-Party Complaint
`Joint Claim Chart and Prehearing Statement
`
`Opening Claim Construction Briefs
`
`Responsive Claim Construction Briefs
`
`Markman Hearing (9:00 AM)
`
`Initial Expert Reports
`
`Rebuttal Expert Reports
`
`Deadline to Amend Pleadings
`
`Deadline to Note Discovery Motions
`
`Close of Discovery
`
`Deadline to File Dispositive Motions
`
`Deadline to Note Dispositive Motions
`
`Date
`October 11, 2018
`
`July 27, 2018
`
`August 2, 2018
`
`August 16, 2018
`
`September 21, 2018
`
`(Subject to the Court’s availability)
`
`October 23, 2018
`
`November 8, 2018
`
`November 13, 2018
`
`November 16, 2018
`
`[No later than the Friday before
`discovery closes]
`
`November 19, 2018
`
`November 20, 2018
`
`December 14, 2018
`
`[No later than fourth Friday after filing]
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`[PROPOSED] AMENDMENT TO SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`- 1 -
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 12 of 13
`
`Event
`Deadline to hold Settlement Conference per CR
`39.1(c)(2)
`
`Deadline to File Motions in Limine
`
`Deadline to Note Motions in Limine
`
`Date
`December 21, 2018
`
`February 22, 2019
`
`March 8, 2019
`
`[No later than second Friday after filing]
`
`Pretrial Order
`
`Pretrial Conference (2:00 PM)
`
`Trial Briefs, Proposed Voir Dire Questions and
`Jury Instructions
`Trial (7-8 days)
`
`March 7, 2019
`
`March 11, 2019
`
`March 18, 2019
`
`March 25, 2019
`
`Except as otherwise specified by this Order, all provisions of the December 14, 2017
`
`Scheduling Order shall remain the same.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2018.
`
`The Honorable James L. Robart
`United States District Court Judge
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`[PROPOSED] AMENDMENT TO SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`- 2 -
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00932-JLR Document 68 Filed 03/30/18 Page 13 of 13
`
`Presented by:
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, PC
`
`By: /s/ Gregory L. Watts
`Gregory L. Watts, WSBA # 43995
`Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
`Professional Corporation
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5100
`Seattle, WA 98104-7036
`Telephone: (206) 883-2500
`Facsimile: (206) 883-2699
`Email: gwatts@wsgr.com
`
`James C. Yoon, CA Bar #177155 (pro hac vice)
`Ryan R. Smith, CA Bar #229323(pro hac vice)
`Albert Shih, CA Bar # 251726 (pro hac vice)
`Jamie Y. Otto, CA Bar # 295099 (pro hac vice)
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`Professional Corporation
`650 Page Mill Road
`Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
`Telephone: (650) 493-9300
`Facsimile: (650) 565-5100
`Email: jyoon@wsgr.com
`
`
`rsmith@wsgr.com
`
`
`ashih@wsgr.com
`
`
`jotto@wsgr.com
`
`Ty W. Callahan, CA Bar # 312548 (pro hac vice)
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`Professional Corporation
`633 West Fifth Street, Suite 1550
`Los Angeles, CA 90071-2027
`Telephone: (323) 210-2900
`Facsimile: (866) 974-7329
`Email: tcallahan@wsgr.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs
`HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`[PROPOSED] AMENDMENT TO SCHEDULING ORDER
`2:17-CV-00932-JLR
`
`- 3 -
`
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5100
`SEATTLE, WA 98104-7036
`TEL: (206) 883-2500
`FAX: (206) 883-2699
`
`