Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04752/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04752-18/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
Counter-claimant
The Coast Distribution System, Inc.
Counter-claimant

Document Text:

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

AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

THE COAST DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM,

INC.,

Defendant.

 /

No. C 06-04752 JSW

ORDER SETTING TELEPHONIC

HEARING ON COAST’S MOTION

TO CONTINUE CLAIM

CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING OR

ODER COMPLIANCE AND

GRANTING MOTION TO HEAR

MATTER ON SHORTENED TIME

The Court has received the Motion to Extend Deadlines for Claim Construction Briefing

Pending Honda’s Compliance With Court Order, or in the Alternative to Order Compliance by

August 30, 2007 filed by Defendant The Coast Distribution System, Inc. (“Coast”). This matter

is fully briefed and ripe for resolution. Accordingly, Coast’s motion to hear this matter on

shortened time (Docked No. 87) is GRANTED.

The parties shall appear for a telephonic hearing on August 29, 2007 at 1:45 p.m. 

Counsel for each side shall contact the Court’s Courtroom Deputy, Jennifer Ottolini, to provide

her with a landline on which counsel can be reached by no later than 9:00 a.m. on August 29,

2007.

The Court does not intend the parties to re-argue the positions set forth in their

brief, nor shall they submit any additional authorities on this issue. Rather, the parties

shall be prepared to address the following questions:

1. In its reply brief, Coast asserts that Honda has not yet set forth preliminary

infringement contentions as to “the KG144 and KG 158 engines.” Does Honda

Case 3:06-cv-04752-JSW Document 96 Filed 08/28/07 Page 1 of 2
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

2

dispute that assertion? If so, where in the Preliminary Infringement Contentions

can the Court find a reference to those specific engine numbers?

2. Even if Honda has not yet identified these engines in its preliminary

infringement contentions, how will identification alter the current claim

construction briefing? That is, will additional terms be at issue other than those

terms to which the parties have agreed? Will additional claims be at issue, such

that the Court would be required to look to how terms are used in claims that

have not yet been asserted to inform its decision on claim construction?

a. If preliminary infringement contentions will not affect either the claim

terms or the claims at issue, what is Coast’s best argument that it cannot

complete claim construction briefing without knowing Honda’s position

on these engines?

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 28, 2007 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-04752-JSW Document 96 Filed 08/28/07 Page 2 of 2