UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Hypertherm, Inc.

v. Civil No. 05-cv-373-JD

American Torch Tip Company

Procedural Order

The court’s order on claim construction in this patent

infringement case issued on January 29, 2008. After motions for

reconsideration and for an interlocutory appeal were resolved,

the parties filed nine motions for summary judgment on

Hypertherm, Inc.’s infringement claims and American Torch Tip

Company’s (“ATTC”) counterclaims and defenses. Hypertherm also

moved to strike certain evidence submitted by ATTC in opposition

to one of Hypertherm’s motions for summary judgment.

On July 24, 2008, the court granted in part and denied in

part Hypertherm’s motion for summary judgment on ATTC’s defense

of patent invalidity and on the issue of whether certain ATTC

products infringe Hypertherm’s patents. Because other pending

motions might address issues that were resolved in that order,

the court ordered the parties to file a joint notice specifying

the parts of the pending motions that have been resolved or

changed by the July 24 order. On August 6, 2008, the court

granted Hypertherm’s motion to strike certain evidence submitted

Case 1:05-cv-00373-JD Document 292 Filed 08/13/08 Page 1 of 3
2

by ATTC in opposition to another motion for summary judgment.

ATTC has filed a motion for reconsideration of the court’s

July 24 order granting, in part, Hypertherm’s motion for summary

judgment. The parties have filed their notice, as ordered in the

July 24 order, which in eighteen pages documents extensive

disagreement between them as to the effect of the July 24 order. 

The parties also continue to file replies and surreplies to the

pending motions.

Trial of this case is scheduled for the trial period

beginning on November 4, 2008. The final pretrial conference is

scheduled to be held on October 20, 2008. The number and

complexity of the pending motions require more time for their

consideration than the existing trial schedule will permit. In

addition, decisions on the pending motions may change

significantly the claims, counterclaims, and defenses in this

case and may also provide incentive to the parties to resolve or

limit the issues before trial. Therefore, the trial must be

continued and rescheduled.

Case 1:05-cv-00373-JD Document 292 Filed 08/13/08 Page 2 of 3
3

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the trial scheduled for the trial

period beginning on November 4, 2008, is continued and will be

rescheduled for February 17, 2009. The final pretrial conference

scheduled for October 20, 2008, is rescheduled for February 3,

2009.

SO ORDERED.

/s/JosephA. DiClerio, Jr.

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

 United States District Judge

August 13, 2008

cc: Benjamin M. Stern, Esq.

 Jacob K. Baron, Esq.

 Jeremy P. Oczek, Esq.

 Jonathan A. Lax, Esq.

 Joseph A. Capraro, Jr., Esq.

 Rhett R. Krulla, Esq.

 Seth M. Cannon, Esq.

 Steven M. Bauer, Esq.

 Richard C. Nelson, Esq.

 Ami D. Gandhi, Esq.

 Jeffery M. Cross, Esq.

 Jill C. Anderson, Esq.

 John M. Skeriotis, Esq.

 Joseph T. Dattilo, Esq.

 Marc H. Kallish, Esq.

 W. Scott O'Connell, Esq.

 Jamie N. Hage, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00373-JD Document 292 Filed 08/13/08 Page 3 of 3