Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 140 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/24/2023 Page 1 of 7
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`
`Case No.: 1:22-cv-22706-SCOLA/GOODMAN
`
`
`BELL NORTHERN RESEARCH, LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`HMD AMERICA, INC., HMD GLOBAL OY,
`SHENZHEN CHINO-E COMMUNICATION CO.
`LTD., TINNO MOBILE TECHNOLOGY CORP.,
`SHENZHEN TINNO MOBILE CO., LTD., TINNO
`USA, INC., UNISOC TECHNOLOGIES CO. LTD.,
`WINGTECH TECHNOLOGY CO. LTD.,
`WINGTECH INTERNATIONAL, INC., BEST BUY
`CO., INC., BEST BUY STORES L.P., TARGET
`CORP., WALMART INC.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`__________________________________/
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY CERTAIN PATENT
`CONTENTION AND CLAIM CONSTRUCTION DEADLINES,
`AND REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING SCHEDULE
`
`Defendants HMD AMERICA, INC., HMD GLOBAL OY, BEST BUY CO., INC., BEST
`
`BUY STORES L.P., TARGET CORP., WALMART INC. (collectively, “Defendants”)1 pursuant
`
`to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b), move for entry of an Order staying certain patent
`
`contention and claim construction deadlines established in this Court’s January 25, 2023
`
`Scheduling Order, Order of Referral to Mediation, Patent Rules, and Protective Order (the
`
`“Scheduling Order”; ECF No. 125), as described below. In support of this requested relief,
`
`Defendants state as follows:
`
`
`1 Undersigned counsel has been authorized by counsel for all Defendants, except Unisoc
`Technologies Co., Ltd., to represent that the each of the Defendants join in the requested relief.
`See Dkt. 136 (Order granting partial stay as to Unisoc).
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 140 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/24/2023 Page 2 of 7
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`On January 25, 2023, the Court entered the Scheduling Order which set forth the
`
`deadlines for patent contentions, claim construction, other pre-trial matters, and the trial in this
`
`action.
`
`2.
`
`On February 7, 2023, the time set forth in the Scheduling Order, Plaintiff Bell
`
`Northern Research, LLC (“Plaintiff”) served its Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement
`
`Contentions (the “Infringement Contentions”) to each Defendant.
`
`3.
`
`Defendants’ responsive contentions are due on March 10, 2023, in accordance with
`
`the Scheduling Order. See ECF No. 125 (setting March 10, 2023 as the “[d]eadline for a party
`
`opposing a claim of patent infringement or asserting invalidity or unenforceability to serve Non-
`
`Infringement, Unenforceability, and Invalidity Contentions and make accompanying document
`
`production.”).
`
`4.
`
`Defendants contend that Plaintiff’s Infringement Contentions do not comply with
`
`the Court’s Patent Rules and that Defendants are unable to respond to the non-compliant
`
`contentions.
`
`5.
`
`On February 16, 2023, counsel for the parties held a telephonic meet-and-confer
`
`regarding Plaintiff’s Infringement Contentions.
`
`6.
`
`After conferral, the parties remain at an impasse as to the sufficiency of Plaintiff’s
`
`Infringement Contentions, which Defendants are challenging.
`
`7.
`
`Plaintiff’s counsel has represented that they are not available for a hearing on
`
`Magistrate Judge Goodman’s discovery calendar on March 2 or March 3 (i.e. before Defendants’
`
`March 10 deadline). The parties are conferring regarding availability for Judge Goodman’s March
`
`13 or March 15 discovery calendars, but both dates are after Defendants’ deadline to serve
`
`responsive contentions.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 140 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/24/2023 Page 3 of 7
`
`8.
`
`Although Defendants are available to participate in a hearing before Judge
`
`Goodman prior to the deadline for Defendants’ responsive contention, Plaintiff is unavailable on
`
`the earlier dates.
`
`9.
`
`A stay is necessary to preserve party resources because preparing responsive
`
`contentions in accordance with the Patent Rules is a formidable undertaking in light of the
`
`Plaintiff’s allegations of infringement of 76 patent claims across 13 patents by over 70 products,
`
`which is exacerbated by the Plaintiff’s failure to serve Infringement Contentions that comply with
`
`the Court’s Patent Rules.
`
`10.
`
`The unique facts and procedural posture of this case warrants a stay of certain patent
`
`contention and claim construction deadlines until the Court rules on the sufficiency of Plaintiff’s
`
`Infringement Contentions which form the basis of Plaintiff’s infringement claims and govern the
`
`scope of discovery on the related issues in this patent infringement litigation.
`
`11.
`
`Accordingly, Defendants are requesting the Court stay the following claim
`
`construction deadlines until thirty (30) days after the Court’s ruling on the sufficiency of Plaintiff’s
`
`Infringement Contentions:
`
`March 10, 2023
`
`April 14, 2023
`
`
`Deadline for a party opposing a claim of patent infringement or asserting
`invalidity
`or
`unenforceability
`to
`serve Non-Infringement,
`Unenforceability, and Invalidity Contentions and make accompanying
`document production.
`
`Deadline to Exchange Proposed Terms for Construction.
`
`12.
`
`On February 24, 2023, the parties held a telephonic meet and confer on the
`
`proposed stay of the patent contention and claim construction deadlines until the Court rules on
`
`the sufficiency of Plaintiff’s Infringement Contentions; Plaintiff opposes the proposed stay.
`
`13.
`
`In view of the responsive contention deadline on March 10, Defendants further
`
`request that the Court limit the pages for briefing and order expedited briefing on this Motion as
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 140 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/24/2023 Page 4 of 7
`
`follows: Plaintiff’s response due March 1, 2023 and Defendants’ reply, if any, due March 3, 2023,
`
`limited to five pages each.
`
`MEMORANDUM OF LAW
`
`The Court “has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to control
`
`its own docket.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997); Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248,
`
`254 (1936) (“[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every court to
`
`control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for
`
`counsel, and for litigants.”); Chrysler Int’l Corp. v. Chemaly, 280 F.3d 1358, 1360 (11th Cir. 2002)
`
`(“At the outset, we stress the broad discretion district courts have in managing their cases.”);
`
`Johnson v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. of Georgia, 263 F.3d 1234, 1269 (11th Cir. 2001) (“[W]e accord
`
`district courts broad discretion over the management of pre-trial activities, including discovery and
`
`scheduling.”).
`
`Defendants submit that good cause exists to stay certain patent contention and claim
`
`construction deadlines until the resolution of the dispute regarding Plaintiff’s Infringement
`
`Contentions because the Court’s ruling on the matter will impact the scope of Defendants’
`
`responsive contentions and potentially the scope of the entire case and because Defendants are
`
`presently unable to respond to the non-compliant contentions.
`
`WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request the Court to enter an Order granting a stay
`
`of the contention and claim construction deadlines referenced above until thirty (30) days after the
`
`resolution by the Court on the sufficiency of Plaintiff’s Infringement Contentions and further
`
`request that the Court order expedited briefing, limited to five pages, on this Motion in accordance
`
`with the attached proposed order.
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 140 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/24/2023 Page 5 of 7
`
`LOCAL RULE 7.1(a)(3) CERTIFICATION
`
`Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(a)(3)(A), I hereby certify that counsel for the movant has
`
`conferred with all parties or non-parties who may be affected by the relief sought in this motion
`
`via teleconference in a good faith effort to resolve the issues but have been unable to resolve the
`
`issues.
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Jodi-Ann Tillman
`JOSEPH W. BAIN, Esq.
`Florida Bar No. 860360
`Email: jbain@shutts.com
`SHUTTS & BOWEN LLP
`1100 City Place Tower
`525 Okeechobee Boulevard
`West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
`Telephone: (561) 835-8500
`Facsimile: (561) 650-8530
`
`JODI-ANN TILLMAN, ESQ.
`Florida Bar No. 1022214
`Email: jtillman@shutts.com
`SHUTTS & BOWEN LLP
`200 East Broward Blvd.
`Suite 2100
`Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301
`Telephone: (561) 671-5822
`Facsimile: (561) 650-8530
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR
`DEFENDANTS HMD AMERICA,
`INC., HMD GLOBAL OY, BEST
`BUY, BEST BUY STORES, L.P.,
`TARGET CORP. and WALMART INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Matthew J. Moffa
`MATTHEW J. MOFFA, ESQ. (pro hac vice)
`Email: MMoffa@perkinscoie.com
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`1155 Avenue of the Americas, 22nd floor
`New York, NY 10036
`Telephone: (212) 262-6900
`
`KEVIN PATARIU, ESQ. (pro hac vice)
`Email: kpatariu@perkinscoie.com
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`11452 El Camino Real
`Suite 300
`San Diego, CA 92013
`Telephone: (858) 720-5700
`
`MICHAEL A. CHAJON, ESQ. (pro hac vice)
`Email: MChajon@perkinscoie.com
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`700 13th Street, NW
`Suite 800
`Washington, D.C. 20005-3960
`Telephone: (202) 654-6200
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
`HMD AMERICA, INC., HMD GLOBAL
`OY, BEST BUY, BEST BUY STORES, L.P.,
`and TARGET CORP.
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 140 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/24/2023 Page 6 of 7
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 24th day of February, 2023, I electronically filed the
`
`foregoing with the Clerk of Court by using the CM/ECF system which served a copy to counsel
`
`of record.
`
`/s/ Jodi-Ann Tillman
`
`
`
`SERVICE LIST
`
`
`
`Alexander Frederick Rojas, Esq.
`Florida Bar No. 124232
`Jose Ignacio Rojas, Esq.
`Florida Bar No. 331546
`ROJASLAW
`201 S. Biscayne Blvd., Ste 28th Floor
`Miami, FL 33131
`Telephone: (305) 446-4000
`Facsimile: (305) 985-4146
`Email: arojas@rojaslawfirm.com
`jrojas@rojaslawfirm.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`BELL NORTHERN RESEARCH, LLC
`
`
`Andrew J. Fuller, Esq.
`Florida Bar No. 1021164
`NELSON MULLINS
`2 South Biscayne Blvd.
`Suite 21st Street
`Miami, Florida 33131
`Tel: 305-373-9487
`Email: Andrew.fuller@nelsonmullins.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
`TINNO MOBILE TECHNOLOGY
`CORP.,
`SHENZHEN TINNO MOBILE CO., LTD
`& TINNO USA, INC.
`
`Christopher Clayton, Esq. (pro hac vice)
`Paul Richter, Esq. (pro hac vice)
`Adam Woodward (Florida Bar No. 1029147)
`DEVLIN LAW FIRM LLC
`1526 Gilpin Avenue
`Wilmington, DE 19806
`Telephone: (302) 449-9010
`Facsimile: (302) 353-4251
`Email: cclayton@devlinlawfirm.com
`prichter@devlinlawfirm.com
`awoodward@devlinlawfirm.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`BELL NORTHERN RESEARCH, LLC
`
`
`Jason Xu, Esq. (pro hac vice)
`RAMON LAW
`1990 K. Street
`Suite 420
`Washington, DC 20006
`Tel: 202-470-2141
`Email: Jason.Xu@ramonlaw.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
`TINNO MOBILE TECHNOLOGY
`CORP.,
`SHENZHEN TINNO MOBILE CO., LTD
`& TINNO USA, INC.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-22706-RNS Document 140 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/24/2023 Page 7 of 7
`
`Terri Ellen Tuchman Meyers, Esq.
`Florida Bar No. 881279
`Marissa Reichel, Esq.
`Florida Bar No. 1016190
`KLUGER, KAPLAN, SILVERMAN,
`KATZEN & LEVINE, P.L.
`201 S. Biscayne Blvd.
`Twenty Seventh Floor
`Miami, Florida 33131
`Tel: 305-379-9000
`Email: tmeyers@klugerkaplan.com
`mreichel@klugerkaplan.com
`
`Yi Yu, Esq. (pro hac vice)
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
`GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`1875 Explorer Street
`Suite 800
`Reston, VA 20190
`Tel: 571-203-2700
`Email: yi.yu@finnegan.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
`UNISOC TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD.
`
`
`Andrew J. Fuller, Esq.
`Florida Bar No. 1021164
`NELSON MULLINS RILEY &
`SCARBOROUGH LLP
`2 South Biscayne Blvd.
`Suite 21st Street
`Miami, Florida 33131
`Tel: 305-373-9487
`Email: Andrew.fuller@nelsonmullins.com
`Vicki.mattison@nelsonmullins.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
`WINGTECH TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.
`WINGTECH INTERNATIONAL, INC.
`
`
`
`Qingyu Yin, Esq. (pro hac vice)
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
`GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`901 New York Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20001
`Tel: 202-408-4000
`Email: qingyu.yin@finnegan.com
`
`Benjamin R. Schlesinger, Esq. (pro hac vice)
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
`GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`271 7th Street, NW
`Suite 1400
`Atlanta, GA 30363
`Tel: 404-653-6416
`Email: Benjamin.schlesinger@finnegan.com
`
`Jacob A. Schroeder, Esq. (pro hac vice)
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
`GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`3300 Hillview Avenue
`Palo Alto, CA 94304
`Tel: 650-849-6600
`Email: Jacob.schroeder@finnegan.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
`UNISOC TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD.
`
`David M. Airan, Esq. (pro hac vice)
`Christopher Gass, Esq. (pro hac vice)
`Nicole E. Kopinski Esq. (pro hac vice)
`LEYDIG, VOIT & MEYER, LTD.
`Two Prudential Plaza
`Sui8te 4900
`180 North Stetson Avenue
`Chicago, IL 60601
`Tel: 312-616-5600
`Email: dairan@leydig.com
`cgass@leydig.com; nkopinski@leydig.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
`WINGTECH TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.
`WINGTECH INTERNATIONAL, INC.
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`