WHEREAS, a conflict has arisen for counsel for Plaintiff Acceleration Bay LLC due to the trial date for a case filed in 2014 being recently set for July 9, 2018, the same date scheduled for the start of the trial in the 16-454 action;

I ' ' f WHEREAS, the parties have conferred regarding changing the date for the trial in the 16- 454 action, while preserving the trial dates scheduled in the other two related actions and maintaining the current order of the trials; WHEREAS, in light of these proposed continuances of the trial dates, the parties propose further modifications to certain upcoming due dates in the above referenced actions; WHEREAS, the parties agree that the requested schedule changes will benefit both the parties and the Court (and will not disrupt the existing trial date set in the 16-453 action); IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties, subject to the approval of the Court, that the Scheduling Order (C.A.

No. 310) is amended as shown in the table below: Opening Expert Reports September 25,2017 Rebuttal Expert Reports November 8,2017 ·· ' :1· ;,~ •4~ 's' · .

February 2, 2018 February 23, 2017 February 2, 2018 (Unchanged) April 20, 2018 EA: June 29, April 20, 2018 2018 (Unchanged) Take-Two: August 17, 2018 Trial April 30, 2018 April 30, 2018 (Unchanged) EA: July 9, 2018 Take-Two: August 27, 2018 December 8, 2017: invalidity reply report January 24, 2018: all other reply reports January 10, 2018: validity expert depositions February 23: all other expert depositions February 2, 2018: invalidity/validity March 23, 2018: other motions EA: August 17, 2018 (previously held for Take-Two) Take-Two: Oct/Nov.

LLP By: Isl Philip A. Rovner Philip A. Rovner (#3215) Jonathan A. Choa (#5319) Hercules Plaza P.O.

In Defendants' Motion for Clarification to the Court's Claim Construction Opinion and Order (No. 16-453, D.I.

281), the parties' positions on term 4 have evolved from those in the Joint Claim Construction Brief.

Thus, the parties are directed to submit additional briefs on the issues of ( 1) whether there is a substantive difference between the algorithm/"process of a new computer Z connecting to the broadcast channel" of Figures 3A and 3B and corresponding specifications and the algorithm /"processing of the connect routine" of Figure 8 and corresponding specifications, and (2) if there is a difference, whether Figures 3A and 3B and corresponding specifications constitute a separate algorithm.

Defendant should submit an opening brief of no more than 10 pages double-spaced 7 days from the date of this order.

Defendant may file a reply brief of no more than 5 pages within 7 days.

RLF1 18091364v.1 The Defendants and Sony contend that these agreements are extremely confidential and sensitive, such that the redacted financial terms should not be disclosed even under the Protective Order.

On July 17, 2017, Special Master Order No. 6 was entered, indicating that after receipt of Plaintiff’s expert reports, it may be appropriate to reconsider the Defendants’ Motion for sanctions and appropriate relief.

The Kramer Levin firm maintains that it acted properly and professionally with respect to representation of Dr. Abarbanel, including in connection with the errata sheet to his deposition.

Kramer Levin provided some documentation privately to the Special Master for an in camera review of certain of the communications with Dr. Abarbanel concerning his deposition.

Motion D involves Interrogatory Nos. 5 and 7, which seek the basis for Plaintiff’s claims that it is entitled to a royalty on foreign revenue and on products playable on the Sony Play Station System.

Defendants request a delay in the schedule.

The request is that the schedule be adjusted so that everything "proceed[ s] in an orderly fashion after claim construction is complete."

I would give Defendants more latitude ifl thought the excessive amount of claim construction was Plaintiffs responsibility, but I am pretty sure that, on claim construction at least, it is Defendants who have said that every last word in the claims needs to be construed.

Defendants cannot have their cake and eat it too.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 1 day of September 2017. '

I am asked to sustain objections to a procedural ruling of the Special Master.

The Special Master set a page limit on expert reports.

The limit set by the Special Master was 2500 pages.

To put this in perspective, War and Peace, one of the longest works of fiction ever published, is 1440 pages when translated to English.

I also note that it is routine to put limits on the length of a trial; I do not think it is unreasonable to put a limit on the length of expert reports.