Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00986/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00986-56/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

UNTED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNA

NOVA MEASURNG INSTRUMENTS

11 LTD.,

No. C 05-0986 MMC (BZ)

DISCOVERY REFEREE ORDERS NO.2 12 Plaintiff,

13 v.

14 NANOMETRICS, INC.,

15 Defendants.

16

17 On February 1, 2007 and February 2, 2007, counsel for plaintiff and counsel for

18 defendant submitted various requests/motions to be resolved. Lead counsel for plaintiff were

19 Mauricio Flores and Darrin Frankin. Lead counsel for defendant were Ron Finley, Craig

20 Hansen and Justin Beck. Telephonic hearings were heard on the morning of February 2 and the

21 afternoon of February 2, 2007.

22 Following receipt of letter briefs, e-mail requests from counsel and consideration of

23 interrogatory answers, requests for admissions, and responses to requests for production of

24 documents, and consideration of oral argument thereon, IT is ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:

26

25 DEFENDAN'S REQUEST FOR A SUPPLEMENTAL ANSWER

TO INTERROGATORY NO. 19

27 Granted. Plaintiff is to supplement its answer to Interrogatory 19 and explain when the

28 Benchmark System was built and when it was offered for sale to Applied Materials.

i 98977-003/224969 1

Case 3:05-cv-00986-MMC Document 307 Filed 02/02/07 Page 1 of 3
7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

2

3

4

5

6

Plaintiff is to further identify the purchase order in connection with the Applied Materials

purchase order by Bates number, when the purchase order was sent, whether and in what

manner Nova responded and when.

PLAINTIFF SEEKS AN ORDER THAT SUR-REBUTTAL

WITNESSES BE BARD FROM TESTIMONY AT TRIAL

Granted without prejudice. It is apparent that plaintiff submitted sur-rebuttal witnesses

without providing the reports required by court order of Judge Chesney.

This order is granted without prejudice in that it is conceivable that good cause could be

shown by either plaintiff or defendant, or both, seeking the need for such a witness.

Accordingly, the Discovery Referee defers to the trial court if and when this issue is

presented.

PLAINTIFF SEEKS THREE SETS OF E-MAILS FROM

SELIGSON, BARLIZAY & MOORE

Stipulation. "The parties have stipulated that the e-mails relating to these three

individuals will be produced by 5:00 p.m. on February 5, 2007. The parties have

agreed to a "clawback agreement" to speed production of these documents. If plaintiff

produces privileged e-mails in connection with this production and/or work product

privileged documents, they will be returned to the plaintiff by the defendant,

immediately. No copies shall be maintained by the defendant of such documents. The

documents will be produced in the native format and a declaration shall be filed in

connection with this production certifying that the e-mails being produced by these

three individuals are being produced in their native format and are all of the e-mails

from the individuals.

PLAINTIFF REQUESTS FURTHER ADMISSION TO REQUEST

FOR ADMISSION NO. 49

The motion/request is denied. If defendant can come up with more identifying

information to ease the plaintiffs burden in discovering exactly what defendant seeks,

a furher motion can be brought on this subject.

i 98977-003/224969 2

Case 3:05-cv-00986-MMC Document 307 Filed 02/02/07 Page 2 of 3
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

PLAINTIFF REQUESTED FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUESTS

FOR ADMISSIONS 2 THROUGH 11 AN 13 THROUGH 41

The ruling on this motion is deferred until adequate documentation can be presented to

the discovery referee so that an informed decision can be made.

PLAINTIFF REQUESTS FURTHER DOCUMENT PRODUCTION

Granted. As to Request for Productions 100 - 108, 111 - 123, 126 - 128, 131 - 133,

136 - 138, 141 - 148, 150 - 164, plaintiff is to provide a privilege log as to privileged

documents withheld pursuant to this production request.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 109 - 110, 124 - 125, 129 -

130, 134 - 135, 139 - 140, 149, 165 - 168

Granted. Nova is to provide a complete answer to this Request for Production of

Documents. In its responses, Nova stated that, "... to the best of its knowledge, it is

not withholding any non-privileged documents responsive to this request." This is an

inadequate answer. The answer should be responsive and state whether or not it has

any such documents. Finally, plaintiff suggested that it has withheld privileged

documents. If it has done so, it must provide an adequate privilege log.

Dated: February 2, 2007

i 98977-003/224969 3

Case 3:05-cv-00986-MMC Document 307 Filed 02/02/07 Page 3 of 3