Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

Broadcom Corporation et al v. WI-Lan, Inc.,, No. 2:09-cv-00322 (E.D. Tex. June 25, 2009)

See Opinion Disposition stated in the opinion
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:09-cv-00322, Dkt. No. 37
Decided
June 25, 2009
Judge
See opinion
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER FOLLOWING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. The parties shall meet and confer to determine a procedure for production of a summary document summarizing the patents and products relevant to this litigation. Deadline to file summary document …
Length
3 pages

2

3

4

5

6

7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9 SAN JOSE DIVISION

10 Intel Corporation, NO. C 08-04555 JW

___________________________________/ NO. C 08-05544 JW

ttrr 11 NO. C 08-05543 JW uuoo Marvell Semiconductor, Inc., et al., NO. C 08-05624 JW

aann 12 ___________________________________/ NO. C 08-05742 JW CC ii

rr oo tt ff cc iill

aa 13 Broadcom Corp., et al., ORDER FOLLOWING CASE ii CC rrttss ffoo tt ___________________________________/ MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

cc 14 ii ii DD rr

ttss iiDD Acer America Corp., et al., ss eett nnrreehh 15 ___________________________________/ aa tt

rr tt oo SS NN eehh 16 Sony Computer Entertainment America, ddee tt rr Inc., et al.,

oo 17 tt FF ii nnUU Plaintiffs,

18 v.

19 Wi-LAN, Inc.,

20 Defendant.

/

21

On June 23, 2009, the Court conducted a Case Management Conference in the Intel Corp. v. 22

Wi-LAN actions. Counsel for the respective parties were present as well as counsel for the related 23

action. Based on the discussion at the conference, the Court sets the following schedule for the next 24

stages of these related litigations:

25

(1) On or before August 24, 2009, the parties in the Intel Action shall jointly file a 26

document summarizing the patents and products relevant to this litigation. The 27

document shall contain (a) a list of all patents in suit; (b) a description of the claims2 1 relevant to Intel’s purported non-infringement; and (c) a description of the features

2 and functions of the relevant accused products. The parties shall meet and confer to

3 determine a procedure for production of this summary document.

4 (2) On September 2, 2009 at 9 a.m., the parties in all actions shall appear for a Case

5 Management Conference.

6 (3) On September 28, 2009 at 9 a.m., the Court will conduct a hearing on Defendant’s

7 Motion for Certification of Interlocutory Appeal or Motion for Reconsideration of the

8 Court’s June 4, 2009 Order. In additions, the Court will hear Defendant’s Motions to

9 Transfer the related Bluetooth actions to the Eastern District of Texas. The parties

10 shall adhere to the briefing schedule as set forth in the Court’s Civil Local Rules.

t 11 r u o

an 12 Dated: June 25, 2009 C i ro JAMES WARE t f c il

a 13 United States District Judge i C r

f t o s t

c 14 i i D r

ts iD s e n 15

r t e

h a t

r t o S N 16

e h d

t e r

o 17 t F i n U

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

31 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:

2 Adam R. Alper aalper@kirkland.com

Christian Chadd Taylor ctaylor@kirkland.com

3 Gayle Rosenstein Klein gklein@mckoolsmith.com

Gianni Cutri gcutri@kirkland.com

4 Gregory S. Arovas garovas@kirkland.com

John M. Desmarais jdesmarais@kirkland.com

5 Michael C. Spillner mspillner@orrick.com

Michael G. McManus mmcmanus@mckoolsmith.com

6 Michael Woodrow De Vries mike.devries@lw.com

Robert A. Cote rcote@mckoolsmith.com

7

8 Dated: June 25, 2009 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

9

By: /s/ JW Chambers 10 Elizabeth Garcia

Courtroom Deputy t 11 r u o

a 12 C i

n r o t f c il

a 13 i C r

f t o s t

c 14 i i D r

ts iD s e n 15

r t e

h a t

r t o S N 16

e h d

t e r

o 17 t F i n U

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

Broadcom Corporation et al v. WI-Lan, Inc.,, No. 2:09-cv-00322 (E.D. Tex. June 25, 2009).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_09-cv-00322-5
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_09-cv-00322-5

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.