Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00474/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00474-5/pdf.json

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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CASE SCHEDULE

CASE NO. C 05-00474 MMC (MED)

LUCE, FORWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP

NICOLA A. PISANO (State Bar No. 151282)

npisano@luce.com

Del Mar Gateway, 11988 El Camino Real, Suite 200

San Diego, California 92130-2594

Telephone: (858) 720-6320

Facsimile: (858) 523-4326

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant

VALYD, INC.

TOWNSEND AND TOWNSEND AND CREW LLP

THEODORE T. HERHOLD (State Bar No. 122895)

ttherhold@townsend.com

MATTHEW R. HULSE (State Bar No. 209490)

mrhulse@townsend.com

379 Lytton Avenue

Palo Alto, California 94301

Telephone: (650) 326-2400

Facsimile: (650) 326-2422

Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant

COMMUNICATION INTELLIGENCE CORPORATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

VALYD, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

COMMUNICATION INTELLIGENCE

CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Case No. C 05-00474 MMC (MED)

STIPULATION AND ORDER

REGARDING CASE SCHEDULE;

ORDER SETTING LIMIT ON 

CLAIMS TO BE CONSTRUED AT 

HEARING

COMMUNICATION INTELLIGENCE 

CORPORATION,

Counterclaimant,

v.

VALYD, INC.,

Counterdefendant.

Case 3:05-cv-00474-MMC Document 33 Filed 10/12/05 Page 1 of 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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CASE SCHEDULE -1-

CASE NO. C 05-00474 MMC (MED)

Plaintiff and Counterdefendant Valyd, Inc. ("Valyd"), through its undersigned counsel, and 

Defendant and Counterclaimant Communication Intelligence Corporation ("CIC"), through its 

undersigned counsel, hereby submit this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order regarding the case schedule.

WHEREAS, on September 13, 2005 the parties participated in a court-sponsored mediation;

WHEREAS, the parties continue to be involved in settlement negotiations;

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Patent Local Rules and the Pretrial Preparation Order of June 13, 

2005, upcoming case deadlines are as follows:

• Last day to file the Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement—October 11, 

2005

• Last day to complete claim construction discovery—November 10, 2005

• Last day for CIC to file an opening claim construction brief and any evidence 

supporting its claim construction—November 25, 2005

• Last day for Valyd to file a responsive claim construction brief and supporting 

evidence—December 9, 2005

• Last day for CIC to file a reply brief and any evidence directly rebutting the supporting

evidence contained in Valyd's response—December 16, 2005

• Claim Construction Hearing—January 9, 2006

WHEREAS, the parties seek approximately a 30-day extension of the deadlines referenced 

above, to allow the parties to focus their efforts on settlement negotiations;

THEREFORE, the parties stipulate and request that the new deadlines are as follows:

• Last day to file the Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement—November 10,

2005

• Last day to complete claim construction discovery—December 10, 2005

• Last day for CIC to file an opening claim construction brief and any evidence 

supporting its claim construction—December 23, 2005

• Last day for Valyd to file a responsive claim construction brief and supporting 

evidence—January 6, 2006

• Last day for CIC to file a reply brief and any evidence directly rebutting the supporting 

Case 3:05-cv-00474-MMC Document 33 Filed 10/12/05 Page 2 of 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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CASE SCHEDULE -2-

CASE NO. C 05-00474 MMC (MED)

evidence contained in Valyd's response—January 13, 2006

• Claim Construction Hearing—February 8, 2006 (or on a later date which is convenient 

for the Court)

The parties do not seek to reschedule any other case deadlines.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: September 28, 2005 LUCE, FORWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP

By: /S/ Nicola A. Pisano

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant

VALYD, INC.

DATED: September 28, 2005 TOWNSEND and TOWNSEND and CREW LLP

By: /S/ Matthew R. Hulse

Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant

COMMUNICATION INTELLIGENCE CORP.

Concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from counsel for Plaintiff and 

Counterdefendant, Nicola A. Pisano.

ORDER

Pursuant to stipulation, it is so ordered. Further, the parties, in the Joint Claim Construction 

and Prehearing Statement, shall identify no more than a total of eight claim terms for which they will

seek construction at the February 8, 2006 hearing.

DATED: October 11, 2005

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-00474-MMC Document 33 Filed 10/12/05 Page 3 of 3