Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-01578/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-01578-2/pdf.json

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

DANIEL L. FLAMM, et al.,

Defendants.

DANIEL L. FLAMM,

Plaintiff,

v.

GLOBAL FOUNDRIES U.S. INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-01277-BLF

Related Case Nos. 16-cv-01578-BLF; 16-cv01579-BLF; 16-cv-01580-BLF; 16-cv01581-BLF; 16-cv-02252-BLF

ORDER (1) VACATING HEARINGS ON

MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND STAY, (2) 

CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT 

CONFERENCE TO NOVEMBER 3, 2016, 

AND (3) ORDER RE: CONTESTED 

ISSUES

DANIEL L. FLAMM,

Plaintiff,

v.

INTEL CORPORATION,

Defendant.

DANIEL L. FLAMM,

Plaintiff,

v.

MAXIM INTEGRATED PRODUCTS, 

INC.,

Case 5:16-cv-01578-BLF Document 24 Filed 07/22/16 Page 1 of 3
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Defendant.

DANIEL L. FLAMM,

Plaintiff,

v.

MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.,

Defendant.

DANIEL L. FLAMM,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD, et 

al.,

Defendants.

Pursuant to Civ. L.R. 7-1(b), the Court finds Dr. Flamm’s motion to dismiss in Case 15-

01277 and the joint motions to stay in the above-captioned cases suitable for submission without 

oral argument and hereby VACATES the hearing scheduled for July 28, 2016. The Court also 

CONTINUES the case management conference to November 3, 2016 at 11:00 a.m. The Court 

further rules on identified issues in the Fourth Supplemental Case Management Statement as 

follows:

1. In regard to § 8B. Depositions, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ request for 32 hours of 

deposition for Dr. Flamm. Absent Defendants’ agreement to limit themselves to 32 hours 

of total deposition time, Dr. Flamm would be subject to six 7-hour depositions.

2. In regard to § 12 ADR, the requirement to commence ADR is deferred until after the Court 

rules on the motions to stay.

Case 5:16-cv-01578-BLF Document 24 Filed 07/22/16 Page 2 of 3
3

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

Northern District of California

3. In regard to § 17 Scheduling, all case scheduling is deferred until the next CMC which will 

be held after the Court rules on the motion to stay. Discovery shall proceed pursuant to the 

provisions of the Patent Local Rules.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 22, 2016

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:16-cv-01578-BLF Document 24 Filed 07/22/16 Page 3 of 3