1

OGP Version 4.1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

STANDING ORDER GOVERNING PROCEEDINGS (OGP) 4.1—PATENT CASES

This OGP governs proceedings in all patent cases pending before the undersigned or Judge 

Derek T. Gilliland and takes effect upon entry in all patent cases, except where noted. If there are 

conflicts between this OGP and prior versions in existing cases that the parties are unable to 

resolve, the parties are encouraged to contact the Court for guidance via email to the Court’s law 

clerk.

Parties should generally email any inquiries to the Court’s law clerk. The Court’s voicemail is 

not checked regularly. Email is the preferred contact method.

Parties should generally use the following email address that includes the Court’s law clerks for 

both Judge Albright and Judge Gilliland: 

TXWDml_LawClerks_WA_JudgeAlbright&Gilliland@txwd.uscourts.gov. 

Messages directed only to Judge Albright’s law clerks may be sent to:

TXWDml_LawClerks_WA_JudgeAlbright@txwd.uscourts.gov.

Messages directed only to Judge Gilliland’s law clerks may be sent to:

TXWDml_NoJudge_Chambers_WA_JudgeGilliland@txwd.uscourts.gov. 

I. NOTICE OF READINESS1

In all patent cases pending before the undersigned or Judge Gilliland, the parties are directed to 

jointly file the Case Readiness Status Report (“CRSR”) in the format attached as Appendix B: 

(a) within 7 days after the Defendant (or at least one Defendant among a group of related 

Defendants sued together) has responded to the initial pleadings in cases where there are no 

CRSR Related Cases, or (b) when there are CRSR Related Cases, within 7 days after the last 

Defendant (or last Defendant group when at least one Defendant among the group has 

responded) among the CRSR Related Cases has responded to the initial pleadings. The CRSR 

shall be filed in each case and identify all other CRSR Related Cases. For this Order, cases shall 

be considered CRSR Related Cases when they meet both criteria: (1) the cases are filed within 

30 days after the first case is filed, and (2) the cases share at least one common asserted patent.

The parties shall meet and confer before jointly filing the CRSR. Plaintiff shall have

responsibility for filing the CRSR on time. If the parties have any pre-Markman issues needing 

resolution, the parties shall email the Court a joint submission of the parties’ positions after filing 

the CRSR so the Court can consider whether to hold a hearing to resolve these issues. If the 

1 This supersedes the March 7, 2022 Standing Order Regarding Notice of Readiness for Patent Cases.

FILED

DEPUTY 

CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

BY: ________________________________ April 14, 2022 J. Galindo-Beaver

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 1 of 18
2

OGP Version 4.1

parties do not have any pre-Markman issues needing resolution, then the parties need not email 

the CRSR to the Court.

The Case Management Conference (“CMC”) shall be deemed to occur 14 days after the filing 

date of the CRSR. If the CRSRs in CRSR Related Cases are not all submitted on the same date, 

the CMC shall be deemed to occur 14 days after the last CRSR in those CRSR Related Cases is 

filed. The Court intends to coordinate the CRSR Related Cases on the same schedule with a 

single Markman hearing, so the parties should plan accordingly. In all cases, the Markman

hearing shall be initially scheduled for 23 weeks after the CMC and should be included in the 

parties’ proposed Scheduling Order in accordance with this Order. 

II. GENERAL DEADLINES

The following deadlines apply: 

1. Patent cases shall be set for a Rule 16 CMC in accordance with the preceding section. 

2. Not later than 7 days before the CMC. The plaintiff shall serve preliminary infringement 

contentions chart setting forth where in the accused product(s) each element of the 

asserted claim(s) are found. The plaintiff shall also identify the priority date (i.e., the 

earliest date of invention) for each asserted claim and produce: (1) all documents 

evidencing conception and reduction to practice for each claimed invention, and (2) a 

copy of the file history for each patent in suit.

3. Two weeks after the CMC. The parties shall file a motion to enter an agreed Scheduling 

Order that generally tracks the exemplary schedule attached as Exhibit A to this OGP, 

which should suit most cases. If the parties cannot agree, the parties shall submit a joint 

motion for entry of a Scheduling Order briefly setting forth their scheduling 

disagreement. Absent agreement of the parties, the plaintiff shall be responsible for the 

timely submission of this and other joint filings. When filing any Scheduling Order, the 

parties shall also jointly send an editable copy to the Court’s law clerk. 

4. Seven weeks after the CMC. The defendant shall serve preliminary invalidity contentions 

in the form of (1) a chart setting forth where in the prior art references each element of 

the asserted claim(s) are found, (2) an identification of any limitations the defendant 

contends are indefinite or lack written description under § 112, and (3) an identification 

of any claims the defendant contends are directed to ineligible subject matter under § 

101. The § 101 contention shall (1) identify the alleged abstract idea, law of nature, 

and/or natural phenomenon in each challenged claim; (2) identify each claim element 

alleged to be well-understood, routine, and/or conventional; and (3) to the extent not 

duplicative of §§ 102/103 prior art contentions, prior art for the contention that claim 

elements are well-understood, routine, and/or conventional. The defendant shall also 

produce (1) all prior art referenced in the invalidity contentions, and (2) technical 

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 2 of 18
3

OGP Version 4.1

documents, including software where applicable, sufficient to show the operation of the 

accused product(s).

2

 

III. GENERAL DISCOVERY LIMITS

Except with regard to venue, jurisdictional, and claim construction-related discovery, all other 

discovery shall be stayed until after the Markman hearing. Notwithstanding this general stay of 

discovery, the Court will permit limited discovery by agreement of the parties, or upon request, 

where exceptional circumstances warrant it. For example, if discovery outside the United States 

is contemplated via the Hague, the Court is inclined to allow such discovery to commence before 

the Markman hearing.

Following the Markman hearing, the following discovery limits apply. The Court will consider 

reasonable requests to adjust these limits should circumstances warrant.

1. Interrogatories: 30 per side3

2. Requests for Admission: 45 per side

3. Requests for Production: 75 per side

4. Fact Depositions: 70 hours per side (for both party and non-party witnesses combined)

5. Expert Depositions: 7 hours per report4

Electronically Stored Information. As a preliminary matter, the Court will not require general 

search and production of email or other electronically stored information (ESI) related to email

(such as metadata), absent a showing of good cause. If a party believes targeted email/ESI 

discovery is necessary, it shall propose a procedure identifying custodians and search terms it 

believes the opposing party should search. The opposing party can oppose or propose an 

alternate plan. If the parties cannot agree, they shall contact the Court in accordance with the 

procedures below, to discuss their respective positions.

IV. DISCOVERY DISPUTES

Procedure. A party may not file a Motion to Compel discovery unless: (1) lead counsel have 

met and conferred in good faith to try to resolve the dispute, and (2) the party has contacted the 

Court’s law clerk to summarize the dispute and the parties’ respective positions. When 

2 To the extent it may promote early resolution, the Court encourages the parties to exchange license and 

sales information, but any such exchange is optional during the pre-Markman phase of the case.

3 A “side” shall mean the plaintiff (or related plaintiffs suing together) on the one hand, and the defendant 

(or related defendants sued together) on the other hand. If the Court consolidates related cases for pretrial 

purposes, with regard to calculating limits imposed by this OGP, a “side” shall be interpreted as if the 

cases were proceeding individually. For example, in consolidated cases the plaintiff may serve up to 30 

interrogatories on each defendant, and each defendant may serve up to 30 interrogatories on the plaintiff. 

4 For example, if a single technical expert submits reports on both infringement and invalidity, he or she 

may be deposed for up to 14 hours in total.

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 3 of 18
4

OGP Version 4.1

contacting the Court’s law clerk for discovery or procedural disputes, the following procedures 

shall apply.

If the parties remain at an impasse after lead counsel have met and conferred, the requesting 

party shall email a summary of the issue(s) and specific relief requested to all counsel of record. 

The summary of the issue shall not exceed 500 words for one issue or a combined 1,000 words 

for multiple issues. The responding party has 3 days thereafter to provide an email response, also 

not to exceed 500 words for one issue or a combined 1,000 words for multiple issues. The 

specific relief requested should propose the exact language to be issued in a court order for each 

part of every disputed issue. The specific relief requested does not count toward the word limits. 

The Court encourages the parties to provide their submission in the following table format,

which clearly identifies the disputed issues and specific relief requested.

Example:

Issue Requesting Party’s Position Responding Party’s Position

RFP 1: 

All sale 

records of 

the Product.

Responding Party didn’t produce 

anything. Responding Party keeps 

its sales records in a sales database.

Relief: Order that “Responding 

Party must produce a copy of the 

sales database within 7 days.”

We found no sales records of the 

Product in the sales database.

Relief: Find that “no documents 

responsive to RFP 5 exist” and deny 

Requesting Party’s relief.

ROG 5:

Identify all 

employees 

who worked 

on the

Product.

Responding Party only identified a 

subset of the employees.

Relief: Order that “Responding 

Party is compelled to fully respond 

to ROG 5 by identifying the names 

and locations of the remaining 

employees who worked on Product 

by [date].”

We identified the relevant employees. 

The other employees are not relevant, 

and it is too burdensome to identify 

every employee.

Relief: Order that “Responding Party 

need not identify any other employees in 

response to ROG 5.”

Once the opposing party provides its response, the requesting party shall email the summaries of 

the issues to the Court’s law clerk with opposing counsel copied. If a hearing is requested, the 

parties shall indicate in the email whether any confidential information will be presented. 

Thereafter, the Court will provide guidance to the parties regarding the dispute or arrange a 

telephonic or Zoom hearing. The hearing shall proceed in the sequence of issues charted.

Written Order.

5 Within 7 days of the discovery hearing, the parties shall email a joint proposed 

order to the Court’s law clerk that includes the summaries of the issues, relief requested, and the 

5 This supersedes the June 17, 2021 Standing Order for Discovery Hearings in Patent Cases. 

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 4 of 18
5

OGP Version 4.1

parties’ understanding of the Court’s ruling. If one party disputes the language of the order, then 

that party shall send an editable version of the proposed order to the Court’s law clerk with the 

disputed language in tracked changes.

V. VENUE & JURISDICTIONAL DISCOVERY

The Court hereby6 establishes the following presumptive limits on discovery related to venue 

and jurisdiction: each party is limited to 5 interrogatories, 10 Requests for Production, and 10 

hours of deposition testimony. The time to respond to such discovery requests is reduced to 20 

days. If a party believes these limits should be expanded, the party shall meet and confer with 

opposing counsel and if an impasse is reached, the requesting party is directed to contact the 

Court’s law clerk for a telephonic hearing.

Venue or jurisdictional discovery automatically opens upon the filing of an initial venue or 

jurisdictional motion and shall be completed no later than 10 weeks after the filing of such

motion. Parties shall file a notice of venue or jurisdictional discovery if the discovery will delay 

a response to a motion to transfer.

VI. MOTIONS FOR TRANSFER

This section applies to all cases filed on or after March 7, 2022. Otherwise, the Second Amended 

Standing Order Regarding Motions for Inter-District Transfer controls earlier-filed cases.

A motion to transfer anywhere may be filed within 3 weeks after the CMC or within 8 weeks of 

receiving or waiving service of the complaint, whichever is later. Thereafter, a movant must 

show good cause for any delay and seek leave of court. The deadline for plaintiff’s response is 2

weeks after the completion of venue or jurisdictional discovery. The deadline for Defendant’s 

reply is 2 weeks after the filing of the response. 

The following page limits and briefing schedule apply to motions to transfer: 

a. Opening – 15 pages

b. Response – 15 pages, due 14 days after the completion of venue or jurisdictional 

discovery, if such discovery is conducted; otherwise, 14 days after the Opening brief

c. Reply – 5 pages, due 14 days after the Response brief

All parties who have filed a motion to transfer shall provide the Court with a status report 

indicating whether the motion has been fully briefed at each of the following times: 1) when the 

motion to transfer becomes ready for resolution, 2) at 4 weeks before the Markman hearing date 

if the motion to transfer remains unripe for resolution and 3) if there are multiple Markman

hearings, the status report is due 6 weeks before the first scheduled Markman hearing. In 

addition, if by 1 week before the Markman hearing the Court has not ruled on any pending 

6 This supersedes the June 8, 2021 Amended Standing Order Regarding Venue and Jurisdictional 

Discovery Limits for Patent Cases.

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 5 of 18
6

OGP Version 4.1

motion to transfer, the moving party is directed to email the Court’s law clerk (and the technical 

advisor, when appointed), and indicate that the motion to transfer is pending. 

If a motion to transfer remains pending, the Court will either promptly resolve the pending 

motion before the Markman hearing, or postpone the Markman hearing. Whenever a Markman

hearing is postponed pursuant to this OGP (e.g., because the transfer motion has not yet ripened 

or only recently ripened), Fact Discovery will begin one day after the originally scheduled 

Markman hearing date. 

VII. MEET AND CONFER REQUIREMENT FOR 

EARLY MOTIONS TO DISMISS INDIRECT AND WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT

Any party seeking to dismiss claims of indirect or willful infringement before fact discovery 

must first meet and confer with the opposing party to discuss dismissing those allegations 

without prejudice, with leave to re-plead those allegations with specificity if supported by a good 

faith basis under Rule 11. Under this agreement, the patent owner may re-plead those allegations 

within three months after fact discovery opens, and the parties agree to permit fact discovery on 

indirect and willful infringement during those three months. The party moving to dismiss must 

attach a certification of compliance with this OGP to its motion to dismiss.

An agreement to dismiss under this section shall be filed as a joint notice instead of as a motion.

VIII. INTERIM PROTECTIVE ORDER

The Court provides a Model Protective Order on its website. Pending entry of the final Protective 

Order, the Court issues the following interim Protective Order to govern the disclosure of 

confidential information:

If any document or information produced in this matter is deemed confidential by the 

producing party and if the Court has not entered a protective order, until a protective 

order is issued by the Court, the document shall be marked “confidential” or with some 

other confidential designation (such as “Confidential – Outside Attorneys’ Eyes Only”) 

by the disclosing party and disclosure of the confidential document or information shall 

be limited to each party’s outside attorney(s) of record and the employees of such outside 

attorney(s).

If a party is not represented by an outside attorney, disclosure of the confidential 

document or information shall be limited to one designated “in house” attorney, whose 

identity and job functions shall be disclosed to the producing party 5 days prior to any 

such disclosure, in order to permit any motion for protective order or other relief 

regarding such disclosure. The person(s) to whom disclosure of a confidential document 

or information is made under this OGP shall keep it confidential and use it only for 

purposes of litigating the case.

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 6 of 18
7

OGP Version 4.1

IX. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION 

Limits for Number of Claim Terms to be Construed

Terms for Construction. Based on the Court’s experience, the Court believes that it should 

have presumed limits on the number of claim terms to be construed. The “presumed limit” is the 

maximum number of terms that each side may request the Court to construe without further 

leave of Court. If the Court grants leave for additional terms to be construed, depending on the 

complexity and number of terms, the Court may split the Markman hearing into multiple 

hearings.

The presumed limits based on the number of patents-in-suit are as follows:

1-2 Patents 3-5 Patents More than 5 Patents

8 terms 10 terms 12 terms

When the parties submit their joint claim construction statement, in addition to the term and the 

parties’ proposed constructions, the parties should indicate which party or side proposed that 

term, or if that was a joint proposal.

Briefing Procedure and Page Limits

The Court will require non-simultaneous Markman briefing with the following default page 

limits. When exceptional circumstances warrant, the Court will consider reasonable requests to 

adjust these limits. These page limits shall also apply collectively for coordinated and 

consolidated cases; however, the Court will consider reasonable requests to adjust page limits in 

consolidated cases where circumstances warrant. The Court has familiarity with the law of claim 

construction and encourages the parties to forego lengthy recitations of legal authorities and to 

instead focus on the substantive issues unique to each case. 

Unless otherwise agreed to by the parties, the default order of terms in the parties’ briefs shall be 

based on 1) the patent number (lowest to highest), the claim number (lowest to highest), and 

order of appearance within the lowest number patent and claim. An example order may be as 

follows:

1. 10,000,000 Patent, Claim 1, Term 1

2. 10,000,000 Patent, Claim 1, Term 2 (where Term 2 appears later in the claim than does 

Term 1)

3. 10,000,000 Patent, Claim 2, Term 3 (where Term 3 appears later in the claim than does 

Terms 2 and 3)

4. 10,000,001 Patent, Claim 1, Term 4

5. 10,000,001 Patent, Claim 3, Term 5

6. 10,000,002 Patent, Claim 2, Term 6

If that the same or similar terms appear in multiple claims, those same or similar terms should be 

ordered according to the lowest patent number, lowest claim number, and order of appearance 

within the patent and claim.

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 7 of 18
8

OGP Version 4.1

Brief 1-2 Patents 3-5 Patents More than 5 Patents

Opening

(Defendant)

20 pages 30 pages 30 pages, plus 5 

additional pages for 

each patent over 5 up 

to a maximum of 45 

pages

Response

(Plaintiff)

20 pages 30 pages 30 pages, plus 5 

additional pages for 

each patent over 5 up 

to a maximum of 45 

pages

Reply

(Defendant)

10 pages 15 pages 15 pages, plus 2 

additional pages for 

each patent over 5 up 

to a maximum of 21 

pages

Sur-Reply

(Plaintiff)

10 pages 15 pages 15 pages, plus 2 

additional pages for 

each patent over 5 up 

to a maximum of 21 

pages

After briefing concludes, the parties shall file a Joint Claim Construction Statement and email an 

editable copy to the Court’s law clerks.

Technology Tutorials and Conduct of the Markman Hearing

Technology tutorials are optional, especially in cases where a technical advisor has been 

appointed. If the parties submit one, the tutorial should be in electronic form, with voiceovers, 

and submitted at least 10 days before the Markman hearing. In general, tutorials should be: (1) 

directed to the underlying technology (rather than argument related to infringement or validity), 

and (2) limited to 15 minutes per side. The tutorial will not be part of the record and the parties 

may not rely on or cite to the tutorial in other aspects of the litigation.

The Court generally sets aside one hour for the Markman hearing; however, the Court is open to 

reserving more or less time, depending on the complexity of the case and input from the parties. 

As a general rule, the party opposing the Court’s preliminary construction shall go first. If both 

parties oppose the Court’s preliminary construction, the plaintiff shall typically go first.

The Court will provide preliminary constructions to the parties ahead of the Markman hearing. 

At the Markman hearing, the Court encourages oral arguments that fine-tune the preliminary 

constructions over arguments repeated from the briefs.

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 8 of 18
9

OGP Version 4.1

X. GENERAL ISSUES

1. The Court will entertain reasonable requests to streamline the case schedule and discovery.

The Parties should contact the Court’s law clerk when a change might help streamline the 

case.

2. The Court is generally willing to extend the response to the Complaint up to 45 days if 

agreed by the parties. However, longer extensions are disfavored.

3. Speaking objections during depositions are improper. Objections during depositions shall be 

stated concisely and in a nonargumentative and nonsuggestive manner. Examples of 

permissible objections include: “Objection, leading,” “Objection, compound,” “Objection, 

vague.” Other than to evaluate privilege issues, counsel should not confer with a witness 

while a question is pending. Counsel may confer with witnesses during breaks in a deposition 

without waiving any otherwise applicable privilege.

4. Plaintiff must file a notice informing the Court when an IPR is filed, the expected time for an 

institution decision, and the expected time for a final written decision, within 2 weeks of the 

filing of the IPR.

5. After the trial date is set, the Court will not move the trial date except in extreme situations. 

If a party believes that the circumstances warrant continuing the trial date, the parties are 

directed to contact the Court’s law clerk.

6. The Court does not limit the number of motions for summary judgment (MSJs), Daubert

motions, or Motions in limine (MIL) a party may file. However, absent leave of Court, the 

cumulative page limit for opening briefs for all MSJs is 40 pages per side, for all Daubert 

motions is 40 pages per side, and for all MILs is 15 pages per side. Each responsive MSJ, 

Daubert, and MIL brief is limited to the pages utilized in the opening brief or by the local 

rules, whichever is greater; and the cumulative pages for responsive briefs shall be no more 

than cumulative pages utilized in the opening briefs. Reply brief page limits shall be 

governed by the local rules.

7. For Markman briefs,7 summary judgment motions, and Daubert motions, the parties shall 

jointly deliver to Chambers one double-sided paper copy of the Opening, Response, and 

Reply briefs, omitting attachments, at least 10 days before the hearing. Absent agreement to 

the contrary, the plaintiff shall be responsible for delivering a combined set of paper copies to 

chambers. Each party shall also provide an electronic copy of the briefs, exhibits, and the 

optional technology tutorial via USB drive. For Markman briefs, the parties should also 

include one paper copy of all patents-in-suit and an editable copy of the Joint Claim 

Construction Statement. If the Court appoints a technical advisor, each party shall deliver the 

same to the technical advisor, also 10 days before the hearing. 

7 But if the Court appoints a technical advisor for claim construction, the parties should not provide a 

copy of the Markman briefs to the Court.

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 9 of 18
10

OGP Version 4.1

8. When filing the Joint Claim Construction Statement or proposed Protective Order, the parties 

shall also email the law clerk a Word version of the filed documents.

9. For all non-dispositive motions, the parties shall submit a proposed Order. The proposed 

Order shall omit the word “Proposed” from the title.

10. Unless the Court indicates otherwise, the following Zoom information shall be used for all 

non-private hearings. The public is allowed to attend non-private hearings. Any party who 

intends to present confidential information shall email the Court’s law clerk to request a 

private Zoom setup.

Hearings before Judge Albright: 

https://txwduscourts.zoomgov.com/j/1613131172?pwd=ek9WOFZLeHZXalNYVmFOdkJabDJoQT09

Meeting ID: 161 313 1172

Passcode: 167817

One tap mobile: +16692545252,,1613131172#,,,,*167817 

Hearings before Judge Gilliland:

https://txwduscourts.zoomgov.com/j/1610427634?pwd=V2RpaERVTkdySGI4b2F6cTZGSWRiZz09

Meeting ID: 161 042 7634

Passcode: 098663

One tap mobile +16692545252,,1610427634#,,,,*098663

SIGNED this 14th day of April, 2022.

ALAN D ALBRIGHT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 10 of 18
11

OGP Version 4.1

XI. APPENDIX A – EXEMPLARY SCHEDULE

8 The parties may amend preliminary infringement contentions and preliminary invalidity contentions 

without leave of court so long as counsel certifies that it undertook reasonable efforts to prepare its 

preliminary contentions and the amendment is based on material identified after those preliminary 

contentions were served and should do so seasonably upon identifying any such material. Any 

amendment to add patent claims requires leave of court so that the Court can address any scheduling 

issues.

Deadline Item

8 weeks after receiving or 

waiving service of 

complaint or 3 weeks after 

the CMC, whichever is 

later.

Deadline to file a motion for inter-district transfer. After this 

deadline, movants must seek leave of Court and show good 

cause for the delay. 

7 days before CMC Plaintiff serves preliminary8 infringement contentions in the 

form of a chart setting forth where in the accused product(s) 

each element of the asserted claim(s) are found. Plaintiff shall 

also identify the earliest priority date (i.e. the earliest date of 

invention) for each asserted claim and produce: (1) all 

documents evidencing conception and reduction to practice 

for each claimed invention, and (2) a copy of the file history 

for each patent in suit.

2 weeks after CMC The Parties shall file a motion to enter an agreed Scheduling 

Order. If the parties cannot agree, the parties shall submit a 

separate Joint Motion for entry of Scheduling Order briefly 

setting forth their respective positions on items where they 

cannot agree. Absent agreement of the parties, the Plaintiff 

shall be responsible for the timely submission of this and other 

Joint filings.

7 weeks after CMC Defendant serves preliminary invalidity contentions in the 

form of (1) a chart setting forth where in the prior art 

references each element of the asserted claim(s) are found, (2) 

an identification of any limitations the Defendant contends are 

indefinite or lack written description under section 112, and 

(3) an identification of any claims the Defendant contends are 

directed to ineligible subject matter under section 101. 

Defendant shall also produce (1) all prior art referenced in the 

invalidity contentions, and (2) technical documents, including 

software where applicable, sufficient to show the operation of 

the accused product(s).

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 11 of 18
12

OGP Version 4.1

9 Any party may utilize a rebuttal expert in response to a brief where expert testimony is relied upon by 

the other party.

9 weeks after CMC Parties exchange claim terms for construction.

11 weeks after CMC Parties exchange proposed claim constructions.

12 weeks after CMC Parties disclose extrinsic evidence. The parties shall disclose 

any extrinsic evidence, including the identity of any expert 

witness they may rely upon with respect to claim construction 

or indefiniteness. With respect to any expert identified, the 

parties shall identify the scope of the topics for the witness’s 

expected testimony.

9

 With respect to items of extrinsic 

evidence, the parties shall identify each such item by 

production number or produce a copy of any such item if not 

previously produced.

13 weeks after CMC Deadline to meet and confer to narrow terms in dispute and 

exchange revised list of terms/constructions.

14 weeks after CMC Defendant files Opening claim construction brief, including 

any arguments that any claim terms are indefinite.

17 weeks after CMC Plaintiff files Responsive claim construction brief. 

19 weeks after CMC Defendant files Reply claim construction brief.

19 weeks after CMC Parties to jointly email the law clerks (see OGP at 1) to 

confirm their Markman date and to notify if any venue or 

jurisdictional motions remain unripe for resolution.

21 weeks after CMC Plaintiff files a Sur-Reply claim construction brief.

3 business days after 

submission of sur-reply

Parties submit Joint Claim Construction Statement and email 

the law clerks an editable copy. 

See General Issues Note #7 regarding providing copies of the 

briefing to the Court and the technical advisor (if appointed).

22 weeks after CMC (but 

at least 10 days before 

Markman hearing)

Parties submit optional technical tutorials to the Court and 

technical advisor (if appointed).

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 12 of 18
13

OGP Version 4.1

10 All deadlines hereafter follow the original Markman hearing date and do not change if the Court delays 

the Markman hearing. 

23 weeks after CMC (or as 

soon as practicable)10

Markman Hearing at 9:00 a.m. This date is a placeholder and 

the Court may adjust this date as the Markman hearing 

approaches.

1 business day after 

Markman hearing

Fact Discovery opens; deadline to serve Initial Disclosures per 

Rule 26(a).

6 weeks after Markman

hearing

Deadline to add parties.

8 weeks after Markman

hearing

Deadline to serve Final Infringement and Invalidity 

Contentions. After this date, leave of Court is required for any 

amendment to infringement or invalidity contentions. This 

deadline does not relieve the parties of their obligation to 

seasonably amend if new information is identified after initial 

contentions. 

16 weeks after Markman

hearing

Deadline to amend pleadings. A motion is not required unless 

the amendment adds patents or patent claims. (Note: This 

includes amendments in response to a 12(c) motion.)

26 weeks after Markman Deadline for the first of two meet and confers to discuss 

significantly narrowing the number of claims asserted and 

prior art references at issue. Unless the parties agree to the 

narrowing, they are ordered to contact the Court’s law clerk to 

arrange a teleconference with the Court to resolve the disputed 

issues.

30 weeks after Markman

hearing

Close of Fact Discovery.

31 weeks after Markman

hearing 

Opening Expert Reports.

35 weeks after Markman

hearing

Rebuttal Expert Reports.

38 weeks after Markman

hearing

Close of Expert Discovery.

39 weeks after Markman

hearing

Deadline for the second of two meet and confers to discuss 

narrowing the number of claims asserted and prior art 

references at issue to triable limits. If it helps the parties 

determine these limits, the parties are encouraged to contact 

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 13 of 18
14

OGP Version 4.1

the Court’s law clerk for an estimate of the amount of trial 

time anticipated per side. The parties shall file a Joint Report 

within 5 business days regarding the results of the meet and 

confer.

40 weeks after Markman

hearing

Dispositive motion deadline and Daubert motion deadline.

See General Issues Note #7 regarding providing copies of the 

briefing to the Court and the technical advisor (if appointed).

42 weeks after Markman

hearing

Serve Pretrial Disclosures (jury instructions, exhibits lists, 

witness lists, discovery and deposition designations).

44 weeks after Markman

hearing 

Serve objections to pretrial disclosures/rebuttal disclosures.

45 weeks after Markman

hearing

Serve objections to rebuttal disclosures; file Motions in 

limine.

46 weeks after Markman

hearing

File Joint Pretrial Order and Pretrial Submissions (jury 

instructions, exhibits lists, witness lists, discovery and 

deposition designations); file oppositions to motions in limine

47 weeks after Markman

hearing

File Notice of Request for Daily Transcript or Real Time 

Reporting. If a daily transcript or real time reporting of court 

proceedings is requested for trial, the party or parties making 

said request shall file a notice with the Court and email the 

Court Reporter, Kristie Davis at kmdaviscsr@yahoo.com

Deadline to meet and confer regarding remaining objections 

and disputes on motions in limine. 

8 weeks before trial Parties to jointly email the Court’s law clerk (See OGP at 1) to 

confirm their pretrial conference and trial dates.

3 business days before 

Final Pretrial Conference.

File joint notice identifying remaining objections to pretrial 

disclosures and disputes on motions in limine.

49 weeks after Markman

hearing (or as soon as 

practicable)

Final Pretrial Conference. Held in person unless otherwise 

requested.

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 14 of 18
15

OGP Version 4.1

11 If the actual trial date materially differs from the Court’s default schedule, the Court will consider 

reasonable amendments to the case schedule post-Markman that are consistent with the Court’s default 

deadlines in light of the actual trial date.

52 weeks after Markman

hearing (or as soon as 

practicable)11

Jury Selection/Trial. 

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 15 of 18
16

OGP Version 4.1

XII. APPENDIX B – EXEMPLARY CASE READINESS STATUS REPORT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

[Plaintiff],

Plaintiff

v.

[Defendant], 

Defendant

Case No. 6:21-cv-00000-ADA

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

CASE READINESS STATUS REPORT

Plaintiff [names] and Defendant [name(s)], hereby provide the following status report.

SCHEDULE

A scheduling order [has been proposed and awaits entry by the Court, has been issued by 

the Court, or has not yet been filed]. 

[Indicate if a Markman date has been set, proposed, or not yet proposed.]

[Indicate if a trial date has been set, proposed, or not yet proposed.]

FILING AND EXTENSIONS

Plaintiff’s Complaint was filed on [filing date]. There have been [one/two] extension[s] for 

a total of __ days.

RESPONSE TO THE COMPLAINT 

[Indicate if/when the Defendant(s) responded to the Complaint, whether it was an Answer 

or Motion, and whether any counterclaims were filed other than counterclaims for noninfringement or invalidity]

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 16 of 18
17

OGP Version 4.1

PENDING MOTIONS

[Identify all pending motions]

RELATED CASES IN THIS JUDICIAL DISTRICT

[Identify all related cases in this Judicial District, including any other cases where a 

common patent is asserted]

IPR, CBM, AND OTHER PGR FILINGS

[There are no known IPR, CBM, or other PGR filings.] [Or]

ALT: IPR2021-00000 was filed on ____ and docketed on ____. An institution decision is 

expected on or before ___. A Final Written decision is expected on or before _____.]

NUMBER OF ASSERTED PATENTS AND CLAIMS

Plaintiff has asserted [Num Patents] patent[s] and a total of [Num Claims] claims. The 

asserted patent(s) are U.S. Patent Nos. ____. 

[If a Plaintiff has already served Preliminary Infringement Contentions (“PICs”), note the 

date of service. Note: Per the Court’s Order Governing Proceeding, Plaintiff must serve PICs no 

later than 7 days before the CMC]

APPOINTMENT OF TECHNICAL ADVISOR

[Indicate if the Parties request, oppose, or defer to the Court on whether to appoint a 

technical advisor to the case to assist the Court with claim construction or other technical issues]

MEET AND CONFER STATUS

Plaintiff and Defendant met and conferred. [The Parties have no pre-Markman issues to 

raise at the CMC.] or [The Parties identified the following pre-Markman issues to raise at the CMC 

[list].

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 17 of 18
18

OGP Version 4.1

Dated: ___________ Respectfully Submitted

/s/

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 189 Filed 04/14/22 Page 18 of 18