Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04752/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04752-15/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 RE JOINT CLAIM

CONSTRUCTION STATEMENT

The Court has received the parties’ Joint Claim Construction Statement, in which they

state that despite meeting and conferring, they have been unable to agree on 23 terms and wish

to present all 23 terms for construction. The parties also state that they do not require a

prehearing conference, to which this Court can only reply, in pop culture parlance, “seriously.”

Pursuant to this Court’s Standing Order for Patent Cases, “the Court will construe no

more than ten terms. If more than ten terms are at issue, the parties shall meet and confer before

the preparation of the joint claim construction statement on narrowing the selection of terms to

be construed by the Court and shall jointly propose the ten terms requiring construction.” 

(Standing Order re Patent Cases ¶ 4.) That Standing Order further provides that:

If a party genuinely believes that it will require that more than ten terms

be construed, that party may request leave to designate additional terms

for construction, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11.... The requesting

party must demonstrate good cause and explain why other methods of

limiting the claims at issue (such as the selection of representative claims

or any grouping of claims by issues presented) would be ineffective. The

request must be filed no later than two weeks before the deadline for

filing the joint claim construction statement. If good cause is shown,

the Court will either agree to construe all terms or schedule a second claim

construction proceeding on the excess terms. If more than ten terms are

Case 3:06-cv-04752-JSW Document 76 Filed 07/11/07 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

submitted for construction without leave of court, the Court will

construe the first ten terms listed in the joint claim construction

statement and sanctions may be imposed. 

(Id. ¶ 5 (emphasis added).)

The parties have not complied with the Court’s Standing Order regarding the submission

of additional terms, and the opening briefs are due on August 27, 2007 and they have failed to

attach the patents in suit to their Joint Claim Construction Statement, as required by the Court’s

Standing Order ¶ 2. 

Accordingly, the Court shall construe only the first ten terms submitted, unless the parties

submit a request demonstrating good cause as to why all 23 terms must be construed to this

Court by July 20, 2007. The parties are FURTHER ORDERED to show cause in writing by July

20, 2007 why sanctions should not be imposed for failing to comply with this Court’s Standing

Order re Patent Cases.

The parties are FURTHER ORDERED to appear for a status conference on August 3,

2007 at 1:30 p.m. to discuss the manner in which claim construction shall proceed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 11, 2007 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-04752-JSW Document 76 Filed 07/11/07 Page 2 of 2