`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`NEODRON, LTD.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`LENOVO GROUP, LTD., et al.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`Case No. 19-cv-05644-SI
`
`
`ORDER RE STIPULATED REQUEST
`RE SECTION 8 OF THE PROTECTIVE
`ORDER
`
`Re: Dkt. No. 55
`
`
`
`The Court, having considered the parties’ stipulated request for the Court to consider the
`
`14
`
`parties’ proposals and approve, modify, or otherwise provide a provision for Section 8 (Prosecution
`
`15
`
`Bar) of the Protective Order in this case, rules as follows.
`
`16
`
`
`
`The Court ORDERS that the language below be adopted into Section 8 of the Protective
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Order entered in this case:
`
`Absent written consent from the Producing Party, any individual who
`receives access
`to
`technical “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL –
`ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL –
`SOURCE CODE” information shall not be involved in the
`prosecution of patents or patent applications relating to touch
`controllers and touch sensors, including without limitation the patents
`asserted in this action and any patent or application claiming priority
`to or otherwise related to the patents asserted in this action, before any
`foreign or domestic agency, including the United States Patent and
`Trademark Office (“the Patent Office”). For purposes of this
`paragraph, “prosecution” includes directly or indirectly drafting,
`amending, advising, or otherwise affecting the scope or maintenance
`of patent claims.1 To avoid any doubt, “prosecution” as used in this
`paragraph does not include representing a party challenging or
`defending a patent before a domestic or foreign agency (including,
`but not limited to, a reissue protest, ex parte reexamination or inter
`partes reexamination) so long as the individual does not participate in
`
`
`1 Prosecution includes, for example, original prosecution, reissue and reexamination
`proceedings.
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
`
`Case 3:19-cv-05644-SI Document 57 Filed 01/23/20 Page 2 of 2
`
`or assist in amending existing claims or adding new claims during the
`proceeding. For the avoidance of doubt, in the event any person files
`a reissue protest, ex parte reexamination, inter partes review, covered
`business methods, post grant review, or other proceeding before the
`Patent Office regarding the Patents-in-Suit or related patents, Outside
`Counsel for any Party involved in said proceeding before the Patent
`Office that has accessed technical “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL –
`OUTSIDE COUNSEL ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL –
`OUTSIDE COUNSEL ONLY – SOURCE CODE” may participate
`and assist in such reexamination, review, or proceeding so long as the
`individual does not participate in or assist in amending existing claims
`or adding new claims during the proceeding. This Prosecution Bar
`shall begin when the affected individual first received access to
`technical “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES
`ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – SOURCE CODE”
`information and shall end eighteen (18) months after final termination
`of this action.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: January 23, 2020
`
`______________________________________
`SUSAN ILLSTON
`United States District Judge
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`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
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
