Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ironburg Inventions Ltd. v. Valve Corp.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle

January 8, 2018

IRONBURG INVENTIONS LTD., Plaintiff,
v.
VALVE CORPORATION, Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER

         A scheduling conference having been conducted on January 5, 2018, at which Robert Becker of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP appeared on behalf of plaintiff Ironburg Inventions, Ltd., and Patrick Lujin and Tanya Chaney of Shook Hardy & Bacon, LLP and Gavin Skok of Fox Rothschild LLP appeared on behalf of defendant Valve Corporation, the following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge:

         (1) Counsel having stated no objection, the Court ADOPTS the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's interpretations relating to the first, third, and fourth disputed claim terms identified in the Joint Claim Construction Statement, docket no. 64, namely

         (1) directional references (top, bottom, front, back, end, side, inner, outer, upper, lower); (3) “inherently resilient and flexible”; and (4) “substantially the full distance between the top edge and the bottom edge.” The Court reserves ruling on whether the fourth claim term is indefinite, as argued by defendant.

         (2) Plaintiff having withdrawn any contention that defendant has infringed or is infringing Claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 8, 641, 525, in which the fifth disputed claim term (“the front end”) appears, the fifth term is STRICKEN from the Joint Claim Construction Statement and will not be construed by the Court.

         (3) With regard to the seventh and eighth disputed claim terms (“a first/second distance between the top edge and the bottom edge” and “substantially all of the first/second distance”), defendant relies on its argument that such claims terms are indefinite and offers no proposed definition. The parties have agreed that, if the Court concludes that such claim terms are not indefinite, the Court need not further construe such claim terms.

         (4) The following dates and deadlines are hereby SET:

JURY TRIAL DATE (5 days)

January 14, 2019

Deadline for filing motion to join Scuf Gaming Inc. as an additional plaintiff

January 18, 2018

Deadline for filing and serving supplemental invalidity contentions (not to exceed ten (10) pages in length)

January 19, 2018

Deadline for filing supplemental briefs (not to exceed twenty (20) pages in length) regarding indefiniteness, as well as claim construction regarding the disputed term “elongate member”

February 1, 2018

Deadline for filing supplemental response briefs (not to exceed ten (10) pages in length)

February 15, 2018

Disclosure of expert testimony under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2)

April 6, 2018

Discovery motions filing deadline

May 24, 2018

Discovery completion deadline

July 6, 2018

Dispositive motions filing deadline

August 9, 2018

Mediation deadline

September 7, 2018

Deadline for filing motion to bifurcate

October 25, 2018

Motions in limine filing deadline

December 6, 2018

Agreed Pretrial Order due

December 20, 2018

Trial briefs, proposed voir dire questions, and jury instructions due

December 20, 2018

Pretrial conference

January 4, 2019, at 2:00 p.m.

         (5) All other dates and deadlines are specified in the Local Civil Rules. These dates are firm, and they can be changed only by order of the Court, not by agreement of counsel or the parties. The Court will alter these dates only upon good cause shown --failure to complete discovery within the time allowed is not recognized as good cause. Counsel must be prepared to begin trial on the date scheduled, but should understand that the trial might have to await the completion of other cases.

         (6) The original and one copy of any exhibits to be used at trial are to be delivered to the Court at least five (5) days before the trial date. Each exhibit shall be clearly marked. Exhibit tags are available in the Clerk's Office. Plaintiff's exhibits shall be numbered consecutively beginning with 1. Defendant's exhibits shall be numbered consecutively beginning with the next multiple of 100 after plaintiff's last exhibit. For example, if plaintiff's last exhibit is numbered 159, then defendant's exhibits shall begin with the number 200. Duplicate documents shall not be listed twice; once a party has identified an exhibit in the Pretrial Order, any party may use it. Each set of exhibits shall be submitted in a three-ring binder with appropriately numbered tabs.

         (7) If the parties reach a settlement in principle, counsel shall immediately ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.