Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-00968/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-00968-13/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 Patent Infringement

---

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Northern District of California

ALEKSANDR L. YUFA,

Plaintiff,

v.

LIGHTHOUSE WORLDWIDE SOLUTION,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

No. C 09-00968 MEJ

ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO

SUBMIT JOINT STATEMENT

On November 14, 2013, the parties in this action appeared before the Court for a hearing on

Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Dkt. No. 94. Both parties indicated that there are

several other actions that Plaintiff has filed involving the ‘983 Patent. Notably, in Plaintiff’s action

against Particle Measuring Systems, Inc., Case No. C 09-1388 PJH, the Honorable Phyllis J.

Hamilton stayed that action in light of the claims construction hearings set in three other actions

involving the ‘983 Patent. Dkt. No. 65. 

In this matter, Defendant argues that Plaintiff never provided infringement contentions, and

thus it is unclear which of Defendant’s products or parts thereof Plaintiff is asserting infringe on the

‘983 Patent. Moreover, without explanation, the parties have apparently opted to bypass any claims

construction hearing, those construction of Claims 6 -8 of the ‘983 Patent are clearly at the core of

this action. 

The Court therefore ORDERS as follows. No later than November 25, 2013, the parties shall

submit a joint statement detailing: (1) how the other pending actions filed by Plaintiff involving the

‘983 patent relate to this matter (particularly, whether the same claims are being construed and

whether tutorials or claims construction hearings have been held or set in those matters); (2) whether

the parties completed the patent disclosures required by Patent Local Rule 3 in this action; (3)

Case 3:09-cv-00968-TSH Document 101 Filed 11/14/13 Page 1 of 2
UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

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

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

whether the parties completed the claims construction procedures set forth in Patent Local Rule 4;

and (4) whether this action should be stayed pending the outcome of the claims constructions in the

related matters that are further along than this action. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 14, 2013 _______________________________

Maria-Elena James 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:09-cv-00968-TSH Document 101 Filed 11/14/13 Page 2 of 2