throbber
Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125 Filed 08/20/20 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 4186
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`









`
`
`JOINT MOTION TO AMEND DOCKET CONTROL ORDER
`
`Case Nos.
`2:19-cv-00161-JRG-RSP
`2:19-cv-00172-JRG-RSP
`2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP
`2:19-cv-00237-JRG-RSP
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`GREE, INC.,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SUPERCELL OY,
`
`
`Plaintiff GREE, Inc. (“GREE”) and Defendant Supercell Oy (“Supercell”) (collectively,
`
`the “Parties”) respectfully file this Joint Motion to Amend the Docket Control Order in these
`
`proceedings. There is good cause to amend the Docket Control Order and extend the close of Fact
`
`Discovery and Expert Report deadlines by approximately two weeks and the Dispositive Motions
`
`and Motions to Strike Expert Testimony by less than one week.
`
`Throughout these litigations and the related litigations the parties have utilized remote
`
`procedures such as videoconference depositions to move the case forward during the COVID-19
`
`crisis. The crisis, however, has introduced complications and the parties are working together to
`
`find solutions to those complications. As discussed in prior briefing in this and the related
`
`litigations, Supercell has noticed several depositions of GREE’s witnesses in Japan that remain
`
`outstanding. See, e.g., GREE, Inc. v. Supercell Oy, No. 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP, Dkts. 98, 102,
`
`106, 107, 113. However, the Government of Japan has implemented a travel ban, banning the
`
`entry of foreigners who have visited certain other countries, including the United States, during
`
`the last 14 days prior to attempted entry unless there are “exceptional circumstances.”1 Further,
`
`
`1 https://www.japan.travel/en/coronavirus/ (last accessed August 19, 2020).
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 1 of 12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125 Filed 08/20/20 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 4187
`
`under Japanese law, video depositions are not permitted, and all depositions must be held at one
`
`of the U.S. Embassy or U.S. Consulate in Japan. At the present time, the U.S. Embassy and
`
`Consulate in Japan is not available for depositions.2 Further, the Japan government has imposed
`
`a 14-day quarantine requirement for Japanese nationals returning from international travel.
`
`However, counsel for the parties understand that the Japanese government has begun certain
`
`discussions to ease COVID-19 travel and quarantine restrictions for international business travel
`
`to and from certain countries.3 Thus, the parties will continue to meet and confer to find solutions
`
`for the outstanding depositions, particularly in light of new developments regarding COVID-19
`
`related restrictions, and for good cause as shown respectfully request that the Court enter the
`
`proposed amended docket control order attached hereto.
`
`The proposed extensions do not require modifying the trial date of December 7, 2020 or
`
`the pretrial date of November 12, 2020. Under the parties’ proposed amended schedule, the
`
`minimum spacing between responses to dispositive motions and the pretrial conference set forth
`
`in this Court’s earlier orders has been preserved. See Order Granting-in-Part Joint Motion to
`
`Amend the Docket Control Order (Dkt. 120), Optis Wireless Tech., LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 2:19-
`
`CV-00066-JRG (E.D. Tex. Mar. 20, 2020), at 2 (J. Gilstrap) (“There should be at least four weeks
`
`between the response to dispositive motions deadline and the pre-trial conference”). While the
`
`parties’ proposed schedule provides only ten days between opening dispositive motions and
`
`responses to dispositive motions, the parties believe good cause for such spacing exists, to provide
`
`additional time for fact and expert discovery.
`
`
`2 https://jp.usembassy.gov/u-s-citizen-services/attorneys/depositions-in-japan/#ava (last accessed
`July 24, 2020).
`3 See https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/08/13/national/japan-singapore-covid-19-border-
`curbs/.
`
`- 2 -
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 2 of 12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125 Filed 08/20/20 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 4188
`
`The deadlines that the parties propose changing are shown in the table below and in the
`
`proposed amended docket control order attached hereto:
`
`Initial Deadline
`
`New Deadline
`
`Event
`
`October 12, 2020
`
`October 15, 2020
`
`
`
`October 15, 2020
`
`September 28, 2020 October 5, 2020
`
`*Response to Dispositive Motions (including
`Daubert Motions). Responses to dispositive
`motions that were filed prior to the dispositive
`motion deadline, including Daubert Motions,
`shall be due in accordance with Local Rule CV-
`7(e), not to exceed the deadline as set forth in
`this Docket Control Order. Motions for
`Summary Judgment shall comply with Local
`Rule CV-56.
`
`to Strike Expert
`to Motion
`*Response
`Testimony (including Daubert Motions)
`
`*File Motions to Strike Expert Testimony
`(including Daubert Motions).
`
`No motion to strike expert testimony (including
`a Daubert motion) may be filed after this date
`without leave of the Court.
`
`September 28, 2020
`
`
`October 5, 2020
`
`*File Dispositive Motions
`
`No dispositive motion may be filed after this
`date without leave of the Court.
`
`Motions shall comply with Local Rule CV-56
`and Local Rule CV-7. Motions to extend page
`limits will only be granted in exceptional
`circumstances.
` Exceptional circumstances
`require more than agreement among the parties.
`
`
`Deadline to Complete Expert Discovery.
`
`September 25, 2020 October 2, 2020
`
`September 11, 2020 September 23, 2020 Serve Disclosures
`Witnesses.
`
`for Rebuttal Expert
`
`- 3 -
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 3 of 12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125 Filed 08/20/20 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 4189
`
`August 21, 2020
`
`September 4, 2020
`
`August 20, 2020
`
`September 3, 2020
`
`Serve Disclosures for Expert Witnesses by the
`Party with the Burden of Proof.
`
`Deadline to Complete Fact Discovery and File
`Motions to Compel Discovery.
`
`
`
`
`Dated: August 20, 2020
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Jessica M. Kaempf
`Jeffrey A. Ware (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Jessica M. Kaempf (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Jonathan G. Tamimi (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`1191 Second Avenue, 10th Floor
`Seattle, WA 98101
`Telephone: 206.389.4510
`Facsimile: 206.389.4511
`Email:
`jware@fenwick.com
`
`
`jkaempf@fenwick.com
`
`
`jtamimi@fenwick.com
`Michael J. Sacksteder (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Bryan A. Kohm (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Christopher L. Larson (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Shannon E. Turner (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Winnie Wong ( Admitted E.D. Texas)
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`555 California Street, 12th Floor
`San Francisco, California 94104
`Telephone: 415.875.2300
`Facsimile: 415.281.1350
`Email: msacksteder@fenwick.com
`
`
`bkohm@fenwick.com
`
`
`clarson@fenwick.com
`
`
`sturner@fenwick.com
`
`
`winnie.wong@fenwick.com
`Geoffrey R. Miller
`(Texas State Bar No. 24094847)
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`902 Broadway, Suite 14
`New York, NY 10010
`
`- 4 -
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 4 of 12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125 Filed 08/20/20 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 4190
`
`
`
`
`Dated: August 20, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Of Counsel:
`
`Telephone: 212.430.2600
`Email:
`gmiller@fenwick.com
`Jennifer R. Bush (Admitted E.D. Texas)
`Fenwick & West LLP
`801 California Street
`Mountain View, CA 94041
`Telephone: 650.988.8500
`Facsimile: 650.938.5200
`Email: jbush@fenwick.com
`Deron R. Dacus
`State Bar No. 00790553
`THE DACUS FIRM, P.C.
`821 ESE Loop 323, Suite 430
`Tyler, TX 75701
`Telephone: 903. 705.1117
`Facsimile: 903.581.2543
`Email:
`ddacus@dacusfirm.com
`Attorneys for Defendant Supercell Oy
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Michael T. Morlock
`Michael T. Morlock
`Melissa R. Smith
`(Texas State Bar No. 24001351)
`GILLAM & SMITH, LLP
`303 South Washington Avenue
`Marshall, Texas 75670
`Telephone: (903) 934-8450
`Facsimile: (903) 934-9257
`Email: melissa@gillamsmithlaw.com
`KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
`Steven D. Moore (CA Bar No. 290875)
`Taylor J. Pfingst (CA Bar No. 316516)
`Rishi Gupta (CA Bar No. 313079)
`Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 1900
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`Telephone: (415) 576-0200
`Facsimile: (415) 576-0300
`Email: smoore@kilpatricktownsend.com
`Email: tpfingst@kilpatricktownsend.com
`Email: rgupta@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 5 of 12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125 Filed 08/20/20 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 4191
`
`Norris P. Boothe (State Bar No. 307702)
`1080 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`Telephone: (650) 326-2400
`Facsimile: (650) 326-2422
`Email: nboothe@kilpatricktownsend.com
`John C. Alemanni (NC Bar No. 22977)
`Taylor Higgins Ludlam (NC Bar No. 42377)
`4208 Six Forks Road
`Raleigh, NC 27609
`Telephone: (919) 420-1700
`Facsimile: (919) 420-1800
`Email: jalemanni@kilpatricktownsend.com
`Email: tludlam@kilpatricktownsend.com
`Michael T. Morlock (GA Bar No. 647460)
`1100 Peachtree Street, NE, Suite 2800
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`Telephone: (404) 815-6500
`Facsimile: (404) 815-6555
`Email: mmorlock@kilpatricktownsend.com
`Alton L. Asher III (NC Bar No. 36579)
`Andrew W. Rinehart (NC Bar No. 46356)
`1001 West Fourth Street
`Winston-Salem, NC 27101
`Telephone: (336) 607-7300
`Facsimile: (336) 607-7500
`Email: aabsher@kilpatricktownsend.com
`Email: arinehart@kilpatricktownsend.com
`Kasey E. Koballa (NC Bar No. 53766)
`607 14th Street, Suite 900
`Washington, DC 20005
`Telephone: (202) 508-5800
`Facsimile: (202) 508-5858
`Email: kkoballa@kilpatricktownsend.com
`Attorneys for Plaintiff GREE, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 6 of 12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125 Filed 08/20/20 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 4192
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in
`
`compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a). All other counsel of record not deemed to have consented
`
`to electronic service were served with a true and correct copy of the foregoing by first class mail.
`
`
`
`/s/ Jessica M. Kaempf
`
`Jessica M. Kaempf
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 7 of 12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125-1 Filed 08/20/20 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 4193
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`
`GREE, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`SUPERCELL OY,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`









`
`
`
`
`Case Nos.
`2:19-cv-00161-JRG-RSP
`2:19-cv-00172-JRG-RSP
`2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP
`2:19-cv-00237-JRG-RSP
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`[PROPOSED] DOCKET CONTROL ORDER
`
`It is hereby ORDERED that the following schedule of deadlines are in effect until
`
`further order of this Court:
`
`Initial Deadline
`
`New Deadline
`
`Event
`
`December 7, 2020
`
`November 9, 2020
`
`November 12, 2020
`
`November 5, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`*Jury Selection -9:00 a.m. in Marshall,
`Texas.
`*Notify Deputy Clerk in Charge regarding the
`date and time by which juror questionnaires
`shall be presented to accompany by jury
`summons if the Parties desire to avail
`themselves the benefit of using juror
`questionnaires.1
`*Pretrial Conference - 9:00 a.m. in
`Marshall, Texas before Judge Roy Payne.
`
`*Notify Court of Agreements Reached During
`Meet and Confer.
`
`The parties are ordered to meet and confer
`on any outstanding objections or motions in
`
`
`1 The Parties are referred to the Court's Standing Order Regard ing Use of Juror Questionnaires in Advance of
`Voir Dire.
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 8 of 12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125-1 Filed 08/20/20 Page 2 of 5 PageID #: 4194
`
`November 5, 2020
`
`October 29, 2020
`
`October 23, 2020
`
`October 23, 2020
`
`October 15, 2020
`
`October 1, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`October 12, 2020
`
`October 15, 2020
`
`limine. The parties shall advise the Court of
`any agreements reached no later than 1:00
`p.m. three (3) business days before the
`pretrial conference.
`
`*File Joint Pretrial Order, Joint Proposed
`Jury Instructions, Joint Proposed Verdict
`Form, Responses to Motions in Limine,
`Updated Exhibit Lists, Updated Witness
`Lists, and Updated Deposition Designations.
`
`*File Notice of Request for Daily Transcript
`or Real Time Reporting.
`
`If a daily transcript or real time reporting of
`court proceedings is requested for trial, the
`party or parties making said request shall file
`a notice with the Court and e-mail the Court
`Reporter, Shelly Holmes, at
`shelly_holmes@txed.uscourts.gov.
`
`File Motions in Limine
`
`The parties shall limit their motions in limine
`to issues that if improperly introduced at trial
`would be so prejudicial that the Court could
`not alleviate the prejudice by giving
`appropriate instructions to the jury.
`
`Serve Objections to Rebuttal Pretrial
`Disclosures.
`
`Serve Objections to Pretrial Disclosures; and
`Serve Rebuttal Pretrial Disclosures.
`
`Serve Pretrial Disclosures (Witness List,
`Deposition Designations, and Exhibit List) by
`the Party with the Burden of Proof.
`
`*Response to Dispositive Motions (including
`Daubert Motions). Responses to dispositive
`motions that were filed prior to the
`dispositive motion deadline, including Daubert
`Motions, shall be due in accordance with
`Local Rule CV-7(e), not to exceed the
`deadline as set forth in this Docket Control
`
`- 2 -
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 9 of 12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125-1 Filed 08/20/20 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: 4195
`
`
`
`October 15, 2020
`
`September 28, 2020 October 5, 2020
`
`Order.2 Motions for Summary Judgment
`shall comply with Local Rule CV-56.
`
`*Response to Motion to Strike Expert
`Testimony (including Daubert Motions)
`
`*File Motions to Strike Expert Testimony
`(including Daubert Motions).
`
`No motion to strike expert testimony
`(including a Daubert motion) may be filed
`after this date without leave of the Court.
`
`September 28, 2020
`
`
`October 5, 2020
`
`*File Dispositive Motions
`
`No dispositive motion may be filed after
`this date without leave of the Court.
`
`Motions shall comply with Local Rule CV-56
`and Local Rule CV-7. Motions to extend
`page limits will only be granted in
`exceptional circumstances. Exceptional
`circumstances require more than agreement
`among the parties.
`
`
`Deadline to Complete Expert Discovery.
`
`September 25, 2020 October 2, 2020
`
`September 11,
`
`2020
`
`September 23, 2020 Serve Disclosures for Rebuttal Expert
`Witnesses.
`
`August 21, 2020
`
`September 4, 2020
`
`August 20, 20203
`
`September 3, 2020
`
`Serve Disclosures for Expert Witnesses by the
`Party with the Burden of Proof.
`
`Deadline to Complete Fact Discovery and
`File Motions to Compel Discovery.
`
`
`2 The parties are directed to Local Rule CV-7(d), which provides in part that “[a] party's failure to oppose a motion
`in the manner prescribed herein creates a presumption that the party does not controvert the facts set out by movant
`and has no evidence to offer in opposition to the motion.” If the deadline under Local Rule CV 7(e) exceeds the
`deadline for Response to Dispositive Motions, the deadline for Response to Dispositive Motions controls.
`
` The parties agree that, after July 30, 2020, neither party will serve new written discovery or deposition notices in
`the -161, -172, -200 or -237 proceedings to each other or to third parties, unless warranted based on information
`
` 3
`
`- 3 -
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 10 of 12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125-1 Filed 08/20/20 Page 4 of 5 PageID #: 4196
`
`
`(*) indicates a deadline that cannot be changed without showing good cause. Good cause is
`not shown merely by indicating that the parties agree that the deadline should be changed.
`
`
`
`
`ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
`
`Mediation: While certain cases may benefit from mediation, such may not be appropriate
`for every case. The Court finds that the Parties are best suited to evaluate whether mediation will
`benefit the case after the issuance of the Court's claim construction order. Accordingly, the Court
`ORDERS the Parties to file a Joint Notice indicating whether the case should be referred for
`mediation within fourteen days of the issuance of the Court's claim construction order. As a part
`of such Joint Notice, the Parties should indicate whether they have a mutually agreeable mediator
`for the Court to consider. If the Parties disagree about whether mediation is appropriate the Parties
`should set forth a brief statement of their competing positions in the Joint Notice.
`
`Summary Judgment Motions, Motions to Strike Expert Testimony, and Daubert
`Motions: For each motion, the moving party shall provide the Court with two (2) hard copies
`of the completed briefing (opening motion, response, reply, and if applicable, sur-reply),
`excluding exhibits, in D-three-ring binders, appropriately tabbed. All documents shall be
`single-sided and must include the CM/ECF header. These copies shall be delivered to the
`Court within three (3) business days after briefing has completed. For expert-related motions,
`complete digital copies of the relevant expert report(s) and accompanying exhibits shall
`submitted on a single flash drive to the Court. Complete digital copies of the expert report(s)
`shall be delivered to the Court no later than the dispositive motion deadline.
`
`
`
`Indefiniteness : In lieu of early motions for summary judgment, the parties are directed
`to include any arguments related to the issue of indefiniteness in their Markman briefing,
`subject to the local rules' normal page limits.
`
`
`
`Motions for Continuance: The following excuses will not warrant a continuance
`nor justify a failure to comply with the discovery deadline:
`
`
`
`(a) The fact that there are motions for summary judgment or motions to dismiss
`pending;
`
`(b) The fact that one or more of the attorneys is set for trial in another court on the same
`day, unless the other setting was made prior to the date of this order or was made as
`a special provision for the parties in the other case;
`
`learned after July 30, 2020, from written discovery or completing depositions that have already been served or
`noticed by one of the parties in those cases or good cause otherwise exists. The parties further agree that nothing
`herein precludes the parties from receiving responses to discovery that has already been served.
`
`- 4 -
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 11 of 12
`
`

`

`Case 2:19-cv-00200-JRG-RSP Document 125-1 Filed 08/20/20 Page 5 of 5 PageID #: 4197
`
`
`(c) The failure to complete discovery prior to trial, unless the parties can demonstrate
`that it was impossible to complete discovery despite their good faith effort to do so.
`
`Amendments to the Docket Control Order (“DCO”): Any motion to alter any date
`on the DCO shall take the form of a motion to amend the DCO. The motion to amend the
`DCO shall include a proposed order that lists all of the remaining dates in one column (as
`above) and the proposed changes to each date in an additional adjacent column (if there is
`no change for a date the proposed date column should remain blank or indicate that it is
`unchanged). In other words, the DCO in the proposed order should be complete such that
`one can clearly see all the remaining deadlines and the changes, if any, to those deadlines, rather
`than needing to also refer to an earlier version of the DCO.
`
`Proposed DCO : The Parties’ Proposed DCO should also follow the format
`described above under “Amendments to the Docket Control Order (‘DCO’).”
`
`
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`Patent Owner Gree, Inc.
`Exhibit 2013 - Page 12 of 12
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket