Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_05-cv-01777/USCOURTS-casd-3_05-cv-01777-0/pdf.json

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

---

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 - 05-CV-1777 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SONY ELECTRONICS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

CIV. NO. 05-CV-1777-B (AJB)

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING

SCHEDULE FOLLOWING

REMAND AND

CONSOLIDATING NEWLYFILED COMPLAINT

vs.

GUARDIAN MEDIA

TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.,

Defendant. _

MITSUBISHI DIGITAL

ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,

Plaintiff,

CIV. NO. 05-CV-1780-B (AJB)

vs.

GUARDIAN MEDIA

TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.,

Defendant.

MATSUSHITA ELECTRONIC

INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD., et al.

Plaintiffs,

CIV. NO. 05-CV-1786-B (AJB)

vs.

GUARDIAN MEDIA

TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.,

Defendant.

THOMSON, INC.,

Plaintiff,

CIV. NO. 07-CV-1613-B (AJB)

vs.

GUARDIAN MEDIA

TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.,

Defendant.

Case 3:05-cv-01777-IEG-MDD Document 79 Filed 09/21/07 Page 1 of 2
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 - 05-CV-1777 

On September 17, 2007, the Court spread the mandate of the Federal Circuit Court of

Appeals vacating this Court’s March 16, 2006 Order of dismissal and remanding these

consolidated patent cases for reconsideration of whether to exercise discretion to entertain

Plaintiffs’ declaratory relief suits. Sony Elec., Inc. v. Guardian Media Tech., Ltd., No. 2006-

1363, 2007 WL 2215762 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 3, 2007). 

Plaintiff Thomson did not join the appeal of the Court’s March 16, 2006 Order;

however, it did file a new declaratory relief action on August 14, 2007. Defendant Guardian

filed a notice of related case. After the hearing, the Court signed a low-number transfer

order. The Court, on its own motion, orders the Clerk to consolidate 07-cv-1613 with 05-cv1777.

As the Court explained at the hearing, the Court will hear Defendant Guardian’s renewed motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on Wednesday, October 17,

2007 at 9:00 a.m. Defendant Guardian filed the motion to dismiss, and in the alternative

moves to transfer, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), the consolidated cases to the Central

District of California, where Guardian has filed a patent infringement case on the instant

patents against another manufacturer. Plaintiffs shall file their opposition briefs on or before

October 3, 2007, and any reply brief shall be filed on or before October 10, 2007.

Plaintiffs have indicated that they will file a motion to stay the cases pending the

completion of the re-examination process by the Patent and Trademark Office. This motion

shall be heard at a later time in the event Defendant’s motion to dismiss and transfer are

denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 20, 2007

Hon. Rudi M. Brewster

United States Senior District Judge

cc: All Parties

Magistrate Judge Battaglia

Case 3:05-cv-01777-IEG-MDD Document 79 Filed 09/21/07 Page 2 of 2