Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-02305/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-02305-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

-1- 06cv2305-BTM (BLM) 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THOMSON INSTRUMENT CO., et

al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

BIOTAGE AB,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 06cv2305-BTM (BLM)

ORDER CONTINUING SECOND CASE

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

On July 5, 2007, Arthur Wellman, counsel for Plaintiffs, and

Debra Nye, counsel for Defendant, jointly contacted the Court to

request a brief continuance of the July 13, 2007 telephonic Case

Management Conference. Counsel represented that due to ongoing

settlement discussions following the District Judge’s denial of

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 34], as well as those

considerations surrounding the filing of potential counterclaims on

or before July 18, 2007, a status conference would be more efficient

if held after the deadline for filing counterclaims. Counsel

therefore requested that the telephonic Case Management Conference

be continued approximately two (2) weeks.

In light of the parties’ representations, and good cause

Case 3:06-cv-02305-BTM-BLM Document 35 Filed 07/05/07 Page 1 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

-2- 06cv2305-BTM (BLM) 

appearing, the telephonic, attorneys-only Case Management Conference

currently scheduled for July 13, 2007 at 9:15 a.m. is hereby

continued to July 27, 2007 at 9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as

the Court’s calendar will allow. The Court will initiate the

conference call.

No later than July 24, 2007, the parties shall meet and

confer pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and file a joint Case

Management Statement. The statement must address all of the topics

set forth in Rule 26 as well as the following:

a. 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;

b. Whether the court will hear live testimony at the Claim

Construction Hearing;

c. The need for and specific limitations on discovery

relating to claim construction, including depositions of percipient

and expert witnesses;

d. The order of presentation at the Claim Construction

Hearing;

e. Any proposed modifications to the limitations on

discovery imposed under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or by

local rule; and

f. Any issues or agreements relating to electronically

stored information or protective orders.

///

///

///

///

Case 3:06-cv-02305-BTM-BLM Document 35 Filed 07/05/07 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

-3- 06cv2305-BTM (BLM) 

Parties are hereby warned that failure to comply with this

Order may result in the imposition of sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 5, 2007

BARBARA L. MAJOR

United States Magistrate Judge

COPY TO:

HONORABLE BARRY TED MOSKOWITZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ALL COUNSEL AND PARTIES

Case 3:06-cv-02305-BTM-BLM Document 35 Filed 07/05/07 Page 3 of 3