Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02845/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02845-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338 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

APPLERA CORPORATION – APPLIED

BIOSYSTEMS GROUP, a Delaware

corporation,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ILLUMINA, INC., a Delaware corporation,

SOLEA, INC., a Delaware corporation, and

STEPHEN C. MACEVICZ, an individual,

Defendants. /

No. C 07-02845 WHA

REQUEST FOR INPUT

RE ORAL ARGUMENT

Now that the claim construction motion has been fully briefed, one question is whether

to rule on the papers or to hold oral argument. In making this call, the Court invites input from

counsel on whether oral argument would be beneficial, most particularly on whether a lawyer

with less than five years of experience (including any clerkship) will argue the motion. The

Court is concerned that junior attorneys are being denied the argument opportunities that they

deserve and are ready to perform. In the Court’s experience, such lawyers have performed

exceedingly well and assigning them the chief role on a motion they have briefed, even in “high

stakes” litigation, is to be encouraged, even if it cannot be required. Please respond by NOON

ON FEBRUARY 6, 2008, in two pages or less. Please do not use this as an opportunity to add

additional points on the merits. 

Dated: January 28, 2008. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:07-cv-02845-WHA Document 104 Filed 01/28/08 Page 1 of 1