Message: Joint hearing statement for Claim Construction, 1/ 9,2015 including Intel !!
17
Oct 07, 2014 04:51PM
ANTON HANDAL (Bar No. 113812)
anh@handal-law.com
PAMELA C. CHALK (Bar No. 216411)
pchalk@handal-law.com
GABRIEL HEDRICK (Bar No. 220649)
ghedrick@handal-law.com
HANDAL & ASSOCIATES
750 B Street, Suite 2510
San Diego, California 92101
Tel: 619.544.6400
Fax: 619.696.0323
Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant
e.Digital Corporation
Additional counsel listed on last page
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
IN RE: EDIGITAL CASES Case Nos.:
13-cv-2905-H-BLM
13-cv-2906-H-BLM
13-cv-2930-H-BLM
13-cv-2943-H-BLM
JOINT HEARING STATEMENT
[PATENT LOCAL RULE 4.2]
Judge: Hon. Judge Marilyn L. Huff
Ctrm: 15A (Annex)
Hearing: January 9, 2015
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Pursuant to Patent Local Rule (“Patent L.R.”) 4.2 and the Court’s June 11,
2014 Consolidated Scheduling Order (“Scheduling Order”), Plaintiff and Counter-
Defendant e.Digital Corporation (“Plaintiff” or “e.Digital”) and Defendants and/or
Counterclaimants
Intel Corporation; Kingston Technology Company, Inc.; PNY
Technologies, Inc., erroneously sued as “PNY Electronics, Inc., dba PNY”; and
Verbatim America, LLC (collectively, “Defendants”) submit this Joint Hearing
I. MOST SIGNIFICANT DISPUTED CLAIM TERMS FOR
CONSTRUCTION
As required under Patent L.R. 4.2.a, the parties jointly identify the following
claim terms of the asserted U.S. Patent No. 5,839,108 (“the ’108 patent”) whose
constructions are believed to be most significant to the resolution of this case, and
whose constructions are believed by one or more parties to be claim dispositive.
1
Claim Term or Phrase Patent Believed
Dispositive?
primary memory ’108 Y
file system ’108 Y
creating ’108 Y
creating the primary memory from a non-volatile,
long term storage medium, wherein the primary
memory comprises a plurality of blocks in which
the data segments are to be stored
’108 Y
coupling a cache memory to the primary memory,
said cache memory providing temporary and
volatile storage for at least one of the data
segments
’108 Y
industry standard data storage format ’108 Y
data storage format ’108 N
Defendants further identify a significant common indefiniteness issue that
relates to multiple terms. Defendants assert that the following terms are indefinite
under 35 U.S.C. § 112 on the grounds that the parent application of the ’108 patent
(
U.S. Patent No. 5,787,445) was not properly incorporated by reference by the
’108 patent: (1) creating the primary memory from a non-volatile, long term
storage medium, wherein the primary memory comprises a plurality of blocks in
which the data segments are to be stored; (2) direct manipulation of contiguous and
1
For the sake of clarity and as set forth in the attached Joint Claim Construction Chart (Exhibit A),
e.Digital does not assert that any of the claims proposed for construction are dispositive except to the extent the
court finds any such term indefinite.
JOINT HEARING STATEMENT PURSUANT TO PATENT L.R. 4.2
non-contiguous data segments; (3) file system; (4) cache memory; (5) a logical link
between the previous logical data segment and the new data segment; (6)
previous
logical data segment
and (7) a path for sequentially accessing the data segments
within the primary memory.
Pursuant to Patent L.R. 4.2.b, the Joint Claim Construction Chart, attached
as Appendix A, contains each party’s proposed constructions of the disputed claim
terms and phrases, together with an identification of intrinsic and extrinsic
evidence proffered by the parties in support of their constructions. Each party
reserves the right to refer to the evidence proffered by the other. Pursuant to Patent
L.R. 4.2.c, the Joint Claim Construction Worksheet is attached as Appendix B.
II. ANTICIPATED LENGTH OF CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING
The parties anticipate that the claim construction hearing will require
approximately four (4) hours, if that is feasible based on the Court’s schedule.
III. WITNESSES
e.Digital may rely on expert testimony from Mr. Neeraj Gupta at the claim
construction hearing. E.Digital may further rely on testimony from the inventors
of the asserted patents, Norbert P. Daberko and/or Richard K. Davis. Defendants
do not intend to call any witnesses to the claim construction hearing but reserve the
right to rely on testimony from inventors Norbert P. Daberko and/or Richard K.
Davis.
IV. ORDER OF PRESENTATION AT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
HEARING
The parties have agreed that they will present their arguments on a term-byterm
basis at the hearing, with the party seeking construction presenting first for
each such term.
JOINT HEARING STATEMENT PURSUANT TO PATENT L.R. 4.2
HANDAL & ASSOCIATES
Dated: October 6, 2014 By:
/s/ Gabriel G. Hedrick
Anton N. Handal
Gabriel G. Hedrick
Pamela C. Chalk
Attorneys for Plaintiff
e.Digital Corporation
Dated: October 6, 2014
PERKINS COIE LLP
By:
/s/Matthew C. Bernstein___________
Matthew C. Bernstein
And:
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
Gregory S. Arovas
Todd M. Friedman
Christopher M. Gerson
Diwei Zhang
Attorneys for Defendant Intel Corporation
Dated: October 6, 2014
NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE +
QUIGG LLP
By:
/s/Breton A. Bocchieri____________
Breton A. Bocchieri
And:
LAW OFFICE OF S.J. CHRISTINE YANG
Christine Yang
Victoria D. Hao
Attorneys for Defendant
Kingston Technology Company, Inc.
Case 3:13-cv-02905-H-BLM Document 35 Filed 10/06/14 Page 4 of 6
-5-
JOINT HEARING STATEMENT PURSUANT TO PATENT L.R. 4.2
Dated: October 6, 2014
MCCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP
By:
/s/Jonathan Short_______________
Jonathan Short
Mark Nikolsky
Matthew Sklar
And:
PESTOTNIK + GOLD LLP
Timothy R. Pestotnik
Russell A. Gold
Russell F. Winslow
Attorneys for Defendant
PNY Technologies, Inc., erroneously
sued as “PNY Electronics, Inc., dba
PNY”
Dated: October 6, 2014
BARNES & THORNBURG LLP
By:
/s/Levi W. Heath_______________
Levi W. Heath
Chad Stover
Attorneys for Defendant
Verbatim Americas, LLC
ATTESTATION OF E-FILED SIGNATURE
Pursuant to Section 2(f)(4) of the Electronic Case Filing Administrative
Policies and Procedures Manual, I, Gabriel G. Hedrick, attest that the above
signatories have read and approved the foregoing and consent to its filing in this
action.
By /s/
Gabriel G. Hedrick
Gabriel G. Hedrick
17 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
10
Oct 07, 2014 05:23PM
13
Oct 07, 2014 05:45PM
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply