Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06053/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06053-12/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SUN MICROSYSTEMS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

 NETWORK APPLIANCE, INC.,

Defendant. /

No. C-07-05488 EDL

Related Case No. C 07-6053 EDL

ORDER FOLLOWING CASE

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Following the July 22, 2008 Case Management Conference in the above captioned case, it is

HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall jointly provide the Court with a list of no more than 15

proposed terms for claim construction. Sun may suggest terms from up to five patents, and NetApp

may suggest terms from up to four patents. The parties shall prepare a chart for these claim terms

that identifies the term to be construed, along with a statement of why these terms need to be

construed, including a statement of which party (or both) would be seeking summary judgment

on the basis of that term and why, and how such terms relate to claims or defenses that will be

presented at trial. The parties shall also disclose any collateral reasons that they seek construction of

such terms, such as ensuring that a party’s future products will be safely outside the scope of an

asserted patent. The Court will then examine the list of patents and determine the number of claim

terms it will construe, which will likely be less than 14, given the fact that there are fewer patents at

issue in this case than in related case 07-6053. The parties shall provide this chart to the Court no

later than August 7, 2008. 

Regarding related case number 07-6053, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the patent tutorial

scheduled for August 4, 2008 is continued to August 11, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. The Court has

reviewed the parties’ briefs and has determined that a tutorial will be helpful. The Court expects

Case 3:07-cv-06053-EDL Document 118 Filed 07/25/08 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

that the tutorial will not exceed two hours, and need not consist of anything elaborate or expensive. 

The parties need not prepare material for the tutorial for the Sun ‘106 or the Sun ‘857 patents. For

the ‘095, ‘630, ‘292, ‘211, and ‘715 patents, the parties should be prepared to briefly discuss the

general technology at issue in the inventions, explain the key figures in the patents (perhaps using

some very simple visual displays), and explain some of the technological terms at issue. The parties

may point out where they dispute the meaning of some of the technological terms, but they should

not delve into their arguments supporting their definition of the various terms. However, some basic

description of technological terms such as storage control units, redundancy group, frames,

distributors, buffers, inode blocks, and data blocks, among others, would be helpful to the Court. 

The claim construction hearing set for August 27, 2008 shall be set for 9:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., with

an hour and a half lunch break.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 25, 2008 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:07-cv-06053-EDL Document 118 Filed 07/25/08 Page 2 of 2