From Document #68 Filed 08/18/16

Civil No. 15cv56-BEN (DHB) e.DIGITAL CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. ARCSOFT, INC., dba Closeli and as simplicam,

Claim Construction Hearing. Pursuant to Patent Local Rule 4.5, a Claim Construction Hearing shall be held before the Honorable Roger T. Benitez, United States District Court Judge, on October 27, 2016 at 10:30 a.m. 4. Amended and Final Contentions. Each party’s “Infringement Contentions” and “Invalidity Contentions” will be deemed to be that party’s final contentions, except as set forth and in compliance with the requirements of Patent Local Rule 3.6. 5. Advice of Counsel. The parties are advised that any party relying upon advice of counsel as part of a patent-related claim or defense for any reason must comply with Patent Local Rule 3.7. 6. Fact Discovery Cutoff. All fact discovery shall be completed by all parties on or before January 27, 2017.

12. Mandatory Settlement Conference. The Mandatory Settlement Conference currently scheduled for October 24, 2016 shall be continued to November 16, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. in the chambers of Magistrate Judge Bartick. Counsel shall submit settlement statements directly to Magistrate Judge Bartick’s chambers no later than November 9, 2016. 1 The parties may either submit confidential settlement statements or may exchange their settlement statements. Each party’s settlement statement shall set forth the party’s statement of the case, identify controlling legal issues, concisely set out issues of liability and damages, and shall set forth the party’s settlement position, including the last offer or demand made by that party, and a separate statement of the offer or demand the party is prepared to make at the Mandatory Settlement Conference. The settlement conference briefs shall not be filed with the Clerk of the Court.

All named parties, all counsel, and any other person(s) whose authority is required to negotiate and enter into settlement shall appear in person at the conference. The individual(s) present at the Mandatory Settlement Conference with settlement authority must have the unfettered discretion and authority on behalf of the party to: 1) fully explore all settlement options and to agree during the Mandatory Settlement Conference to any settlement terms acceptable to the party (G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 1989)), 2) change the settlement position of a party during the course of the Mandatory Settlement Conference (Pitman v. Brinker Int’l, Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (D. Ariz. 2003)), and 3) negotiate a settlement without being restricted by any predetermined level of authority (Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 596 (8th Cir. 2001)).