Free
Message: PACER (digEcor)

Thanks silver ,

Here from pacer describe why DM is against combined trial



e.Digital filed the

Vivitar

Action for patent infringement on September 7, 2007. In the

Vivitar

Action, e.Digital chose to name only Vivitar as a defendant. (See

Doc. No. 1

[Complaint]). Six months later, on March 4, 2008, eDigital filed the

Avid Action. (See

Docket

in

Avid Action, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1). In the

Avid

Action, e.Digital chose to name a group of defendants including Avid Technology, Inc., Casio

America, Inc., LG Electronics USA Inc., Nikon, Inc., Olympus America, Inc., Samsung

Electronics America, Inc. and Sanyo North America Corporation. (

Id.). In both the Vivitar

and

Avid

Actions, e.Digital asserted the same patents, i.e

., U.S. Patent Nos. 5,491,774; 5,742,737;

5,787,445; and 5,839,108 (collectively, the “Patents-in-Suit”); however, the scopes of infringing

products in the two cases are different. In the

Vivitar

Action, e.Digital accuses a narrow set of

digital cameras and camcorders offered by a single defendant -- Vivitar. In the

Avid

Action,

e.Digital accuses a much broader set of digital cameras, camcorders, personal digital recorders,

personal digital assistants and cell phones, among other products offered by that group of

defendants.

Procedurally, the cases also have very different postures. The

Vivitar

Action is well

underway. A scheduling order was agreed to by the parties and submitted to the Court for

approval on May 16, 2008. (

See

Doc. No. 21). Pursuant to that order, e.Digital served its

infringement contentions on May 16, 2008 and Vivitar served its invalidity contentions on July 3,

2008. Furthermore, the parties are required to exchange their Proposed Terms and Claim

Elements on July 10, 2008 and offer proposed claim constructions on July 30, 2008. (

Id.

). The

3

Avid

Action, on the other hand, has yet to substantively proceed. (See Ex. 1 hereto). In the

Avid

Action, the Court has not scheduled an Initial Status Conference, a schedule has not been

discussed, and the parties have not exchanged infringement or invalidity contentions. (

Id.

). In

other words, Vivitar proposes to consolidate its own case that already is well underway and

moving forward with the



Avid

Action that has yet to get out of the starting gate.

Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply