Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03148/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03148-6/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

08929/1845737.1 

Case No. 05-CV-3148-MMC [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION 

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART OLIVER & HEDGES, LLP 

 Kevin Johnson (Bar No. 177129) 

555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 560 

Redwood Shores, California 94065-2139 

Telephone: (650) 801-5000 

Facsimile: (650) 801-5100 

E-Mail: kevinjohnson@quinnemanuel.com 

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART OLIVER & HEDGES, LLP 

 Adrian M. Pruetz (Bar No. 118215) 

865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor 

Los Angeles, California 90017-2543 

Telephone: (213) 443-3000 

Facsimile: (213) 443-3100 

E-Mail: adrianpruetz@quinnemanuel.com 

Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaimant 

MEDIATEK, INC., OPPO DIGITAL, INC., and 

MSI COMPUTER CORP. (erroneously sued as 

Micro-Star International Computer Corp.) 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL 

CO., LTD., 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

MEDIATEK, INC., OPPO DIGITAL, INC., 

and MICRO-STAR INTERNATIONAL 

COMPUTER CORP., 

Defendants.

MEDIATEK, INC., 

Counterclaimant, 

vs.

MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL 

CO., LTD. and PANASONIC 

CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA, 

Counterdefendants.

 CASE NO. 05-CV-3148-MMC 

ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE 

MOTION REQUESTING 

CLARIFICATION OF CLAIM 

CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES 

Case 3:05-cv-03148-MMC Document 75 Filed 03/13/06 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

08929/1845737.1 -2- 

Case No. 05-CV-3148-MMC [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION 

Having considered the Administrative Motion Requesting Clarification of Claim 

Construction Procedures brought by Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.("Matsushita") and 

Panasonic Corporation of North America ("Panasonic"), 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

The motion is denied. Matsushita and Panasonic shall negotiate in good faith under Patent 

L.R. 4-1 concerning the list of claim terms and under Patent L.R. 4-2 concerning the exchange of 

proposed constructions for the claim terms identified by each side as requiring construction. The 

parties must make the required exchanges under Patent L.R. 4-2 on Monday, March 20, 2006. 

DATED: March 13, 2006

 The Honorable Maxine M. Chesney 

United States District Court Judge 

Case 3:05-cv-03148-MMC Document 75 Filed 03/13/06 Page 2 of 2