ECeipt LLC v. Old Navy, LLC

Western District of Texas, txwd-6:2019-cv-00258


Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION ECEIPT LLC, Plaintiff Case No. 6:19-cv-00258-ADA V. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED OLD NAVY, LLC, Defendants AGREED ORDER GOVERNING PROCEEDINGS After a review of the pleaded claims and defenses in this action, in furtherance of the management of the Court's docket under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16, and after receiving the' input of the parties to this action, it is ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Discovery Limitations. Except with regard to discovery necessary for claim construction, all other discovery is stayed until after the Markman hearing. Notwithstanding this general stay of discovery, the Court will permit limited discovery by agreement of the parties, or upon request, where exceptional circumstances warrant. Following the Markman hearing, the following discovery limits will apply to this case. 1. Interrogatories: 30 per side 2. Requests for admission: 45 per side 3. Requests for Production: 75 per side 4. Fact Depositions: 70 hours per side (for both party and non-party witnesses combined) 5. Expert Depositions: 7 hours per report' 1 For example, if a single technical expert submits reports on both infringement and invalidity, he or she may be deposed for up to 14 hours in total. The Court will consider reasonable requests to increase these limits should circumstances warrant. 2. Electronically Stored Information. As a preliminary matter, the Court will not require general search and production of email or other electronically stored information (ES I), absent a showing of good cause. If a party believes targeted email/ESI discovery is necessary, it shall propose a procedure identifying custodians and search terms it believes the opposing party should search. The opposing party can oppose or propose an alternate plan. If the parties cannot agree, they shall contact chambers to schedule a call with the Court to discuss their respective positions. 3. Discovery Disputes. A party may not file a Motion to Compel discovery unless: (1) lead counsel have met and conferred in good faith to try to resolve the dispute, and (2) the party has contacted the Court (with opposing counsel) to arrange a telephone conference to summarize the dispute and the parties respective positions. After hearing from the parties, the Court will determine if further briefing is required. 4. Protective Order. The Court will enter the parties' Agreed Protective Order. Pending entry of the final Protective Order, the Court issues the following interim Protective Order to govern the disclosure of confidential information in this matter: 1) If any document or information produced in this matter is deemed confidential by the producing party and if the Court has not entered a protective order, until a protective order is issued by the Court, the document shall be marked "confidential" or with some other confidential designation (such as "Confidential Outside Attorneys Eyes Only") by the disclosing party and disclosure of the confidential document or information shall AGREED ORDER GOVERNING PROCEEDINGS 2 be limited to each party's outside attorney(s) of record and the employees of such outside attorney(s). 2) If a party is not represented by an outside attorney, disclosure of the confidential document or information shall be limited to one designated "in house" attorney, whose identity and job functions shall be disclosed to the producing party 5 days prior to any such disclosure, in order to permit any motion for protective order or other relief regarding such disclosure. The person(s) to whom disclosure of a confidential document or information is made under this local rule shall keep it confidential and use it only for purposes of litigating the case. 5. Claim Construction Issues. Terms for Construction. The Court does not have a specific limit on the number of asserted claims or claim terms to be construed; however, the Court encourages the parties to focus on their top ten claim terms in order of importance. In cases with an unusually large number of patents or asserted claims, the Court may revisit this topic and will be open to suggestions from the parties. Claim Construction Briefing. The Court will require simultaneous claim construction briefing with the following default page limits; however, the Court will entertain reasonable requests to increase the limits should circumstances warrant: 1.Opening Briefs 30 pages 2. Responsive Briefs 30 pages 3. Reply Briefs 15 pages Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, all simultaneous filings will take place at 5:00 p.m. CT. AGREED ORDER GOVERNING PROCEEDINGS 3 6. Conduct of the Markman Hearing. The Court intends to set aside one full day for the Markman hearing; however, the Court is open to reserving more or less time, depending on the complexity of the case and input from the parties. The Court does not anticipate live technology tutorials. However, the Court encourages the submission of technical tutorials via audio file on the date set by the Court where such tutorials may be of benefit to the Court. The Court will consider the parties suggestions on the order of argument at the Markman hearing. However, if the parties do not suggest a different procedure, the Court will allow the Plaintiff to pick the first term and then alternate by term. 7. General Issues. 1) The Court does not have a limit on the number of motions for summary judgment (MSJs); however, the cumulative page limit for Opening Briefs for all MSJs is 50 pages per side. 2) The Court encourages the submission of briefs longer than 10 pages via audio file so that the Court can listen to the arguments. The recordings shall be made in a neutral fashion, citations need not be read as part of the recording, and each such file shall be served on opposing counsel. Counsel should contact chambers for procedures to submit audio files. 3) The Court will entertain reasonable requests to streamline the case schedule and discovery and encourages the parties to contact the Court (with opposing counsel) when such interaction might help streamline the case. ALAN D ALBRIGHT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE AGREED ORDER GOVERNING PROCEEDINGS 4