Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02737/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02737-8/pdf.json

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SANDISK CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

 v.

LSI CORPORATION,

Defendant. /

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS.

 /

No. C 09-02737 WHA

SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER 

REGARDING RULE 706 EXPERT

The Court apologizes if its prior order regarding the appointment of a Rule 706 expert was

unclear. Under Rule 706, the undersigned seeks a testifying expert who is one of ordinary skill in

the art. While the two candidates proposed by the parties are excellent lawyers, they do not meet

this requirement — they are not persons having ordinary skill in the art relevant to the subject

matter and time frame of the patents-in-suit. Please jointly submit BY NOON ON WEDNESDAY,

FEBRUARY 3, 2010, two candidates that meet this criteria. Subject to motion practice, the Court

envisions that this Rule 706 expert will testify not only at trial, but potentially at claim

construction as well. As such, the two candidates should have qualifications of the type being

considered by counsel for their own use in this litigation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 25, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-02737-WHA Document 75 Filed 01/25/10 Page 1 of 1