Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01838/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01838-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:0271 Patent Infringement

---

1

17CV1838 CAB (BGS)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLEY, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

LIPOPSUN INTERNATIONAL CORP.,

Defendant.

Case No.: 17CV1838 CAB (BGS)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 

JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE 

EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION

[ECF No. 16]

The parties have filed a Joint Motion seeking to continue the Early Neutral 

Evaluation and Case Management Conference scheduled for October 18, 2017 by six 

weeks to allow the parties to gather sales figures, exchange settlement demands and allow 

Liposun to tender its defense to its insurance carrier. (ECF No. 16.) The Joint Motion is 

GRANTED in part. The ENE and CMC are continued to November 17, 2017 at 1:30 

p.m. Other dates are modified as indicated below. 

The following are mandatory guidelines for the parties preparing for the 

Early Neutral Evaluation Conference.

1. Purpose of Conference: The purpose of the Early Neutral Evaluation 

Conference (“ENE”) is to hold a serious discussion of every aspect of the lawsuit in an 

effort to achieve early resolution of the case. All conference discussions will be off the 

Case 3:17-cv-01838-CAB-BGS Document 17 Filed 10/06/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 5
2

17CV1838 CAB (BGS)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

record, privileged and confidential. Counsel for any non-English speaking parties is 

responsible for arranging for the appearance of an interpreter at the conference.

2. Personal Appearance of Parties Is Required: All parties, adjusters for 

insured defendants, and client representatives must be present and have full and complete 

authority to enter into a binding settlement at the ENE.1 The purpose of this requirement 

is to have representatives present who can settle the case during the course of the 

conference without consulting a superior. Counsel for a government entity may be 

excused from this requirement so long as the government attorney who attends the ENE 

conference (1) has primary responsibility for handling the case; and (2) may negotiate 

settlement offers which the attorney is willing to recommend to the government official 

having ultimate settlement authority. Other parties seeking permission to be excused 

from attending the ENE in person must follow the procedures outlined in Judge Skomal’s 

Chambers’ Rules. (See Judge Skomal’s Chambers’ Rules at p. 3, section C.) Failure of 

any of the above parties to appear at the ENE conference without the Court’s permission 

will be grounds for sanctions. The principal attorneys responsible for the litigation must 

also be present in person and prepared to discuss all of the legal and factual issues in the 

case.

3. Confidential ENE Statements Required: No later than November 3, 

2017, the parties must submit confidential ENE statements of seven pages or less. Please 

also attach relevant exhibits. The statement must address the legal and factual issues in 

 

1

“Full authority to settle” means that the individuals at the settlement conference must be authorized to 

fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any settlement terms acceptable to the 

parties. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648 (7th Cir. 1989). The person 

needs to have “unfettered discretion and authority” to change the settlement position of a party. Pitman 

v. Brinker Intl., Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-486 (D. Ariz. 2003). The person must be able to bind the 

party without the need to call others not present at the conference for authority or approval. The purpose 

of requiring a person with unlimited settlement authority to attend the conference includes that the 

person’s view of the case may be altered during the face to face conference. Id. at 486. A limited or a 

sum certain of authority is not adequate. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590 (8th Cir. 2001).

Case 3:17-cv-01838-CAB-BGS Document 17 Filed 10/06/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 5
3

17CV1838 CAB (BGS)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

the case and should focus on issues most pertinent to settling the matter. The statement 

should not repeat facts or law contained in the Complaint or Answer. Statements do not 

need to be filed or served on opposing counsel. The statement must also include any 

prior settlement offer or demand, as well as the offer or demand the party will make at the 

ENE. The Court will keep this information confidential unless the party authorizes the 

Court to share the information with opposing counsel.

ENE statements must be emailed to efile_Skomal@casd.uscourts.gov.

4. New Parties Must Be Notified by Plaintiff’s Counsel: Plaintiff’s counsel 

shall give notice of the ENE to parties responding to the complaint after the date of this 

notice.

5. Case Management Under the Amended Federal Rules and Local Patent 

Rules: The parties can expect to leave the ENE with Rule 26 compliance dates and 

deadlines and a Case Management Order including a Claim Construction briefing 

schedule and hearing date. Parties shall therefore meet and confer pursuant to Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 26(f) no later than 14 days before the ENE regarding the following:

a. Any anticipated objections under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

26(a)(1)(E) to the initial disclosure provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

26(a)(1)(A-D) and the date of initial disclosures;

b. Whether the parties will request the preservation and production of 

Electronically Stored Information ("ESI") and, if so:

i. the nature, location, and scope of discoverable ESI;

ii. the agreed form of production;

iii. the agreed search methodology;

iv. whether any proportionality issues exist and whether the parties have 

identified issues with respect to inaccessible ESI;

c. Any proposed modification of the deadlines provided for in the Patent Local 

Rules, and the effect of any such modification on the date and time of the Claim 

Construction Hearing, if any; 

Case 3:17-cv-01838-CAB-BGS Document 17 Filed 10/06/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 5
4

17CV1838 CAB (BGS)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

d. The need for and specific limitations on discovery relating to claim 

construction, including depositions of percipient and expert witnesses; and any proposed 

modifications to the limitations on discovery imposed under the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure or by local rule;

e. The need, if any, to phase damage discovery.

6. Joint Discovery Plan: The parties must include their positions with respect 

to the meet-and-confer issues listed above, AND propose actual dates for ALL of the 

following deadlines in a Joint Discovery Plan:

- deadline for disclosure of asserted claims and preliminary infringement 

contentions;

- deadline for preliminary invalidity contentions;

- deadline for exchange of proposed claim constructions and extrinsic 

evidence;

- deadline for joint claim construction chart, worksheet and hearing 

statement;

- deadline for completion of claim construction discovery;

- proposed briefing schedule for filing of claim construction briefs

- proposed date and time of the Claim Construction Hearing, if any;

- whether the court will hear live testimony at the Claim Construction 

Hearing;

- the need for and specific limitations on discovery relating to claim 

construction, including depositions of percipient and expert witnesses;

- deadlines for expert witness designation and supplementation;

- deadlines for expert witness report submissions and supplementation

- deadlines for completions of fact and expert discovery;

- deadline for filing pretrial motions; and

- proposed final Pretrial Conference date.

The Joint Discovery Plan shall be submitted via email to Judge Skomal’s 

chambers as well as filed on the CM/ECF system, no later than November 3, 2017

The Court will issue an order following the ENE addressing these issues and setting dates 

as appropriate.

7. Requests to Continue an ENE Conference: Requests to continue ENEs 

are rarely granted. The Court will, however, consider formal motions to continue an 

Case 3:17-cv-01838-CAB-BGS Document 17 Filed 10/06/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 5
5

17CV1838 CAB (BGS)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ENE when extraordinary circumstances exist and the other party has no objection. If

another party objects to the continuance, counsel for both parties must call chambers and 

discuss the matter with the research attorney/law clerk assigned to the case before any 

motion may be filed. Any request for a continuance must be made as soon as counsel 

is aware of the circumstances that warrant rescheduling the conference.

8. Settlement Prior to ENE Conference: The Court encourages the parties 

to work on settling the matter in advance of the ENE Conference. In the event that the 

parties resolve the matter prior to the day of the conference, the following procedures 

must be followed before the Court will vacate the ENE and excuse the parties from 

appearing:

A. The parties may file a Joint Motion to Dismiss and submit a proposed 

order to the assigned district judge. If a Joint Motion to Dismiss is filed, the Court will 

immediately vacate the ENE;

B. If the parties settle more than 24 hours before the conference but are 

not able to file a Joint Motion to Dismiss, they must file a Notice of Settlement 

containing the electronic signatures of counsel for all settling parties and must also 

identify a date by which the Joint Motion to Dismiss will be filed;

C. If the parties settle less than 24 hours before the conference, counsel 

for the settling parties must JOINTLY call chambers and inform the Court of the 

settlement and receive Court permission to not appear at the ENE. 

Questions regarding this case or the mandatory guidelines set forth herein may be 

directed to Skomal's research attorney at (619) 557-2993.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 6, 2017

Case 3:17-cv-01838-CAB-BGS Document 17 Filed 10/06/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 5 of 5