Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-02180/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-02180-16/pdf.json

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

---

STIPULATED MOTION TO MODIFY CASE Case No. 4:09-cv-02180-SBA 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULE 

 - 1 - 

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

RICK N. BRYSON (Pro hac vice) 

Rick.Bryson@SandersParks.com 

MICHELLE BREIT, Bar No. 133143 

Michelle.Breit@SandersParks.com 

BRETT M. HAGER (Pro hac vice) 

Brett.Hager@SandersParks.com 

BENJAMIN ERLICK (Pro hac vice) 

Benjamin.Erlick@SandersParks.com 

SANDERS & PARKS P.C. 

3030 N. Third Street, Suite 1300 

Phoenix, AZ 85012-3099 

Telephone: (602) 532-5600 

Facsimile: (602) 532-5700 

JAMES C. OTTESON, Bar No. 157781 

jim@agilityiplaw.com 

AGILITY IP LAW 

303 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 500 

San Jose, CA 95110-2712 

Telephone: (408) 291-2750 

Facsimile: (408) 297-6000 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

APPLIED SIGNAL TECHNOLOGY, INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

OAKLAND DIVISION 

APPLIED SIGNAL TECHNOLOGY, INC. 

Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

EMERGING MARKETS COMMUNICATIONS, 

INC., EMC SATCOM TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

PARADISE DATACOM, LLC, and VIASAT, 

INC., 

Defendants. 

 Case No. 09-CV-02180-SBA 

STIPULATED MOTION AND ORDER 

TO MODIFY CASE MANAGEMENT 

CONFERENCE SCHEDULE AND 

ADOPTING NEW SCHEDULE 

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

 

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS 

 

 Plaintiff and counter-defendant, Applied Signal Technology, Inc., and each defendant, 

including Emerging Markets Communications, Inc., EMC Satcom Technologies, Inc., Paradise 

Case 4:09-cv-02180-SBA Document 92 Filed 04/27/10 Page 1 of 5
STIPULATED MOTION TO MODIFY CASE Case No. 4:09-cv-02180-SBA 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULE 

 - 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

Datacom, LLC, and defendant and counterclaimant ViaSat, Inc. (collectively “the parties”), hereby 

stipulate and move the Court for an order modifying and extending the dates set by the Court’s 

Case Management Scheduling Order of November 30, 2009, as set forth in the Proposed Order 

filed concurrently herewith. 

The parties request this modified schedule to accommodate two substantial occurrences in 

the lawsuit. First, on or about April 19, 2010, Applied Signal Technology retained and substituted 

new counsel of record as lead counsel to represent the company in this action. At that time, the 

parties’ preliminary claim constructions pursuant to Patent L.R. 4-1 were due in only seven (7) 

days and other critical dates related to claim construction were quickly approaching. An extension 

of the current schedule is needed for Applied Signal’s new counsel to get up to speed on this 

complex litigation. Second, counterclaimant ViaSat has indicated its intent to seek leave to amend 

its counterclaims to add third-party Comtech EF Data (“Comtech”) as a counter-defendant. The 

inclusion of Comtech as a new counter-defendant would thus require additional time for Comtech 

to “catch up” so that it can effectively participate in the claim construction procedures 

concurrently with the existing parties. Comtech and Applied Signal have agreed not to oppose 

ViaSat’s motion to add Comtech as a new counter-defendant on ViaSat’s existing claims for 

infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,907,093 and 6,725,017, subject to the adoption of a modified 

schedule as set forth in the Proposed Order, which accommodates Comtech’s late-comer status. 

ViaSat requested that AST and Comtech stipulate to allow ViaSat to amend its answer and 

counterclaims to add a counterclaim for infringement of an additional ViaSat patent, U.S. Patent 

No. 6,011,952 (“the ’952 patent”) by AST and Comtech, and to place the ’952 patent on the same 

schedule as the existing patents in suit. AST and Comtech refused to stipulate, and therefore 

ViaSat will move to amend its answer and counterclaims to add the ’952 patent to this case 

asserting infringement by both AST and Comtech. AST and Comtech do not oppose the addition 

of Comtech as a counterclaim defendant on ViaSat’s existing claims for infringement of U.S. 

Patent Nos. 6,907,093 and 6,725,017; rather, AST and Comtech are only opposing the addition of 

ViaSat’s ’952 patent as a counterclaim. 

Case 4:09-cv-02180-SBA Document 92 Filed 04/27/10 Page 2 of 5
STIPULATED MOTION TO MODIFY CASE Case No. 4:09-cv-02180-SBA 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULE 

 - 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

Accordingly, the parties collectively request that the Court modify the Case Management 

Scheduling Order to adopt the dates as set forth in the Proposed Order. 

Date: April 23, 2010 SANDERS & PARKS P.C. 

 /s/ Michelle Breit 

 Michelle Breit 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

 APPLIED SIGNAL TECHNOLOGY 

Date: April 23, 2010 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, PLC 

 /s/ Rudolph Telscher 

 Rudolph Telscher 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

 EMERGING MARKETS COMMUNICATIONS, INC. 

 and EMC SATCOM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

 

Date: April 23, 2010 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

 /s/ Seth M. Sproul 

 Seth M. Sproul 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

 PARADISE DATACOM, LLC 

 and VIASAT, INC. 

Case 4:09-cv-02180-SBA Document 92 Filed 04/27/10 Page 3 of 5
STIPULATED MOTION TO MODIFY CASE Case No. 4:09-cv-02180-SBA 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULE 

 - 4 - 

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

DECLARATION OF CONSENT 

 Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B) regarding signatures, I attest under 

penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from Rudolph 

Telscher and Seth M. Sproul. 

 

Date: April 23, 2010 SANDERS & PARKS P.C. 

 /s/ Michelle Breit 

 Michelle Breit 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

 APPLIED SIGNAL TECHNOLOGY 

Case 4:09-cv-02180-SBA Document 92 Filed 04/27/10 Page 4 of 5
STIPULATED MOTION TO MODIFY CASE Case No. 4:09-cv-02180-SBA 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULE 

 - 5 - 

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

ORDER

 The Case Management Conference Schedule filed November 20, 2009 is hereby vacated. 

The following schedule is hereby adopted. 

EVENT DATE

Comtech’s Initial Disclosure June 16, 2010 

Comtech’s Document Production (Patent L.R. 

3-4) due 

July 9, 2010 

Comtech’s Invalidity Contentions (Patent L.R. 

3-3) due 

July 9, 2010 

EMC’s Supplemental Invalidity Contentions July 9, 2010 

Comtech’s Proposed Terms for Construction 

(Patent L.R. 4-1) 

July 21, 2010 

Preliminary Claim Constructions (Patent L.R. 

4-2) due 

July 28, 2010 

(currently April 26, 2010) 

Joint Claim Construction (Patent L.R. 4-3) due August 18, 2010 

(currently May 21, 2010) 

Claim Construction Expert reports (Patent L.R. 

4-3) due 

August 25, 2010 

(currently May 21, 2010) 

L/D for discovery relating to Claim 

Construction (Patent L.R. 4-4) 

September 15, 2010 

(currently June 18, 2010) 

Opening Claim Construction Brief (in 

compliance with Patent L.R. 4-5(a)) 

October 1, 2010 

(currently July 6, 2010) 

Opposing Claim Construction Brief(s) (in 

compliance with Patent L.R. 4-5(b)) due 

October 21, 2010 

(currently August 2, 2010) 

Reply Claim Construction Brief(s) (in 

compliance with Patent L.R. 4-5 (c)) due 

November 4, 2010 

(currently August 25, 2010) 

Tutorial and Claim Construction Hearing (in 

compliance with Patent L.R. 4-6) 

December 2, 2010 @ 9:00 AM 

(currently September 23, 2010) 

Further Case Management Conference December 2, 2010 @ 9:00 AM 

(currently September 23, 2010) 

** Lead counsel for the EMC defendants currently has a trial scheduled that will conflict with the 

proposed December 2, 2010 Markman hearing date. The parties have agreed to select a different 

Markman hearing date with the cooperation of the Court if the conflict remains later in the year. 

Dated: 4/26/10 ___________________________________ 

 SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG 

 JUDGE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

Case 4:09-cv-02180-SBA Document 92 Filed 04/27/10 Page 5 of 5