1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

HANSHOW TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. AND 

SHANGHAI HANSHI INFORMATION 

TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

SES-IMAGOTAG SA, SES-IMAGOTAG GMBH 

AND CAPTANA GMBH 

Defendants.

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 2:23-cv-00617-RWS-RSP 

[PROPOSED] DOCKET CONTROL ORDER 

In accordance with the scheduling conference held in this case, it is hereby ORDERED

that the following schedule of deadlines is in effect until further order of this Court: 

Default Date Proposed Date Event 

October 20, 

2025

 *Jury Selection – 9:00 a.m. in Marshall, Texas

7 days before 

Jury Selection

 *Defendant to disclose final invalidity theories, final prior 

art references/combinations, and final equitable defenses.1

10 days before 

Jury Selection

 *Plaintiff to disclose final election of Asserted Claims.2 

1

 The proposed DCO shall include this specific deadline. The deadline shall read, “7 days before 

Jury Selection,” and shall not include a specific date. 

2

 Given the Court’s past experiences with litigants dropping claims and defenses during or on the 

eve of trial, the Court is of the opinion that these additional deadlines are necessary. The proposed 

DCO shall include this specific deadline. The deadline shall read, “10 days before Jury Selection,” 

and shall not include a specific date. 

Case 2:23-cv-00617-RWS-RSP Document 27-1 Filed 04/17/24 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 358
2 

September 22, 

2025 

 * If a juror questionnaire is to be used, an editable (in 

Microsoft Word format) questionnaire shall be jointly 

submitted to the Deputy Clerk in Charge by this date.3

September 16, 

2025

 *Pretrial Conference – 9:00 a.m. in Marshall, Texas 

before Judge Roy Payne

September 8, 

2025 

 *Notify Court of Agreements Reached During Meet and 

Confer 

The parties are ordered to meet and confer on any 

outstanding objections or motions in limine. The parties 

shall advise the Court of any agreements reached no later 

than 1:00 p.m. three (3) business days before the pretrial 

conference.

September 8, 

2025 

 *File Joint Pretrial Order, Joint Proposed Jury Instructions, 

Joint Proposed Verdict Form, Responses to Motions in 

Limine, Updated Exhibit Lists, Updated Witness Lists, and

Updated Deposition Designations

September 2, 

2025 

 *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 

e-mail the Court Reporter, Shelly Holmes, at 

shelly_holmes@txed.uscourts.gov.

August 25, 

2025 

 File Motions in Limine

The parties shall limit their motions in limine to issues that 

if improperly introduced at trial would be so prejudicial 

that the Court could not alleviate the prejudice by giving 

appropriate instructions to the jury.

August 25, 

2025

 Serve Objections to Rebuttal Pretrial Disclosures 

August 18, 

2025

 Serve Objections to Pretrial Disclosures; and Serve 

Rebuttal Pretrial Disclosures

3

 The Parties are referred to the Court’s Standing Order Regarding Use of Juror Questionnaires in 

Advance of Voir Dire. 

Case 2:23-cv-00617-RWS-RSP Document 27-1 Filed 04/17/24 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 359
3 

August 4, 2025 Serve Pretrial Disclosures (Witness List, Deposition 

Designations, and Exhibit List) by the Party with the 

Burden of Proof

July 28, 2025 *Response to Dispositive Motions (including Daubert

Motions). Responses to dispositive motions that were filed 

prior to the dispositive motion deadline, including Daubert

Motions, shall be due in accordance with Local Rule CV7(e), not to exceed the deadline as set forth in this Docket 

Control Order.4 Motions for Summary Judgment shall 

comply with Local Rule CV-56.

July 14, 2025 *File Motions to Strike Expert Testimony (including 

Daubert Motions) 

No motion to strike expert testimony (including a Daubert

motion) may be filed after this date without leave of the 

Court.

July 14, 2025 *File Dispositive Motions 

No dispositive motion may be filed after this date without 

leave of the Court. 

Motions shall comply with Local Rule CV-56 and Local 

Rule CV-7. Motions to extend page limits will only be 

granted in exceptional circumstances. Exceptional 

circumstances require more than agreement among the

parties. 

July 7, 2025 Deadline to Complete Expert Discovery

June 23, 2025 Serve Disclosures for Rebuttal Expert Witnesses

June 2, 2025 Deadline to Complete Fact Discovery and File Motions to 

Compel Discovery

June 2, 2025 Serve Disclosures for Expert Witnesses by the Party with 

the Burden of Proof

4

 The parties are directed to Local Rule CV-7(d), which provides in part that “[a] party’s failure to 

oppose a motion in the manner prescribed herein creates a presumption that the party does not 

controvert the facts set out by movant and has no evidence to offer in opposition to the motion.” 

If the deadline under Local Rule CV 7(e) exceeds the deadline for Response to Dispositive 

Motions, the deadline for Response to Dispositive Motions controls.

Case 2:23-cv-00617-RWS-RSP Document 27-1 Filed 04/17/24 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 360
4 

May 6, 2025 Comply with P.R. 3-7 (Opinion of Counsel Defenses)

April 15, 2025 *Claim Construction Hearing – 9:00 a.m. in Marshall, 

Texas before Judge Roy Payne

April 1, 2025 *Comply with P.R. 4-5(d) (Joint Claim Construction 

Chart)

March 25, 2025 *Comply with P.R. 4-5(c) (Reply Claim Construction

Brief)

March 18, 2025 Comply with P.R. 4-5(b) (Responsive Claim Construction 

Brief)

March 4, 2025 Comply with P.R. 4-5(a) (Opening Claim Construction 

Brief) and Submit Technical Tutorials (if any) 

Good cause must be shown to submit technical tutorials 

after the deadline to comply with P.R. 4-5(a). 

March 4, 2025 Deadline to Substantially Complete Document Production 

and Exchange Privilege Logs 

Counsel are expected to make good faith efforts to produce 

all required documents as soon as they are available and 

not wait until the substantial completion deadline.

February 18, 

2025

 Comply with P.R. 4-4 (Deadline to Complete Claim 

Construction Discovery)

February 11, 

2025

 File Response to Amended Pleadings 

January 28, 

2025 

 *File Amended Pleadings 

It is not necessary to seek leave of Court to amend

pleadings prior to this deadline unless the amendment 

seeks to assert additional patents.

January 21, 

2025

February 4, 

2025

Comply with P.R. 4-3 (Joint Claim Construction 

Statement)

December 31, 

2024

January 14, 

2025

Comply with P.R. 4-2 (Exchange Preliminary Claim 

Constructions)

December 10, 

2024

December 17, 

2024

Comply with P.R. 4-1 (Exchange Proposed Claim Terms) 

Case 2:23-cv-00617-RWS-RSP Document 27-1 Filed 04/17/24 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 361
5 

 July 29, 2024 Plaintiffs’ Deadline to Respond to Defendants’ Motion to 

Dismiss

July 8, 2024 Deadline to Complete Jurisdictional Discovery

May 15, 2024 Comply with Standing Order Regarding Subject-Matter 

Eligibility Contentions5

May 15, 2024 Comply with P.R. 3-3 & 3-4 (Invalidity Contentions)

April 25, 2024 Defendants to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Complaint

April 24, 2024 *File Proposed Protective Order and Comply with 

Paragraphs 1 & 3 of the Discovery Order (Initial and 

Additional Disclosures) 

The Proposed Protective Order shall be filed as a separate 

motion with the caption indicating whether or not the 

proposed order is opposed in any part.

April 17, 2024 *File Proposed Docket Control Order and Proposed 

Discovery Order 

The Proposed Docket Control Order and Proposed 

Discovery Order shall be filed as separate motions with the 

caption indicating whether or not the proposed order is 

opposed in any part.

April 10, 2024 Join Additional Parties

March 20, 2024 Comply with P.R. 3-1 & 3-2 (Infringement Contentions)

(*) indicates a deadline that cannot be changed without an acceptable showing of good 

cause. Good cause is not shown merely by indicating that the parties agree that the 

deadline should be changed. 

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS 

Mediation: While certain cases may benefit from mediation, such may not be appropriate 

for every case. The Court finds that the Parties are best suited to evaluate whether mediation will 

benefit the case after the issuance of the Court’s claim construction order. Accordingly, the Court 

ORDERS the Parties to file a Joint Notice indicating whether the case should be referred for 

mediation within fourteen days of the issuance of the Court’s claim construction order. As a 

part of such Joint Notice, the Parties should indicate whether they have a mutually agreeable 

5

http://www.txed.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/judgeFiles/EDTX%20Standing%20Order%20R

e%20Subject%20Matter%20Eligibility%20Contentions%20.pdf [https://perma.cc/RQN2-YU5P] 

Case 2:23-cv-00617-RWS-RSP Document 27-1 Filed 04/17/24 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 362
6 

mediator for the Court to consider. If the Parties disagree about whether mediation is appropriate, 

the Parties should set forth a brief statement of their competing positions in the Joint Notice. 

Summary Judgment Motions, Motions to Strike Expert Testimony, and Daubert

Motions: For each motion, the moving party shall provide the Court with two (2) hard copies of 

the completed briefing (opening motion, response, reply, and if applicable, sur-reply), excluding 

exhibits, in D-three-ring binders, appropriately tabbed. All documents shall be single-sided and 

must include the CM/ECF header. These copies shall be delivered to the Court within three (3) 

business days after briefing has completed. For expert-related motions, complete digital copies of 

the relevant expert report(s) and accompanying exhibits shall be submitted on a single flash drive 

to the Court. Complete digital copies of the expert report(s) shall be delivered to the Court no later 

than the dispositive motion deadline. 

Indefiniteness: In lieu of early motions for summary judgment, the parties are directed to 

include any arguments related to the issue of indefiniteness in their Markman briefing, subject to 

the local rules’ normal page limits. 

 Lead Counsel: The Parties are directed to Local Rule CV-11(a)(1), which provides that 

“[o]n the first appearance through counsel, each party shall designate a lead attorney on the 

pleadings or otherwise.” Additionally, once designated, a party’s lead attorney may only be 

changed by the filing of a Motion to Change Lead Counsel and thereafter obtaining from the Court 

an Order granting leave to designate different lead counsel. The true lead counsel should be 

designated early and should not expect to parachute in as lead once the case has been largely 

developed. 

Motions for Continuance: The following will not warrant a continuance nor justify a 

failure to comply with the discovery deadline: 

(a) The fact that there are motions for summary judgment or motions to dismiss pending; 

(b) The fact that one or more of the attorneys is set for trial in another court on the same day, 

unless the other setting was made prior to the date of this order or was made as a special 

provision for the parties in the other case; 

(c) The failure to complete discovery prior to trial, unless the parties can demonstrate that it 

was impossible to complete discovery despite their good faith effort to do so. 

Amendments to the Docket Control Order (“DCO”): Any motion to alter any date on 

the DCO shall take the form of a motion to amend the DCO. The motion to amend the DCO shall 

include a proposed order that lists all of the remaining dates in one column (as above) and the 

proposed changes to each date in an additional adjacent column (if there is no change for a date 

the proposed date column should remain blank or indicate that it is unchanged). In other words, 

the DCO in the proposed order should be complete such that one can clearly see all the remaining 

deadlines and the changes, if any, to those deadlines, rather than needing to also refer to an earlier

version of the DCO. 

Case 2:23-cv-00617-RWS-RSP Document 27-1 Filed 04/17/24 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 363
7 

Proposed DCO: The Parties’ Proposed DCO should also follow the format described 

above under “Amendments to the Docket Control Order (‘DCO’).” 

Joint Pretrial Order: In the contentions of the Parties included in the Joint Pretrial Order, 

the Plaintiff shall specify all allegedly infringed claims that will be asserted at trial. The Plaintiff 

shall also specify the nature of each theory of infringement, including under which subsections of 

35 U.S.C. § 271 it alleges infringement, and whether the Plaintiff alleges divided infringement or 

infringement under the doctrine of equivalents. Each Defendant shall indicate the nature of each 

theory of invalidity, including invalidity for anticipation, obviousness, subject-matter eligibility, 

written description, enablement, or any other basis for invalidity. The Defendant shall also specify 

each prior art reference or combination of references upon which the Defendant shall rely at trial, 

with respect to each theory of invalidity. The contentions of the Parties may not be amended, 

supplemented, or dropped without leave of the Court based upon a showing of good cause. 

Trial: All parties must appear in person at trial. All non-individual (including but not 

limited to corporate) parties must appear at trial through the presence in person of a designated 

representative. Once they have appeared, any representative of a non-individual party shall not be 

replaced or substituted without express leave of Court. 

Case 2:23-cv-00617-RWS-RSP Document 27-1 Filed 04/17/24 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 364