People.ai, Inc. v. SetSail Technologies, Inc.

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8

10 PEOPLE.AI, INC., 11 Plaintiff, No. C 20-09148 WHA

12 v.

13 SETSAIL TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND 14 Defendant. AMENDED COMPLAINT

15 16 17 Patent owner People.ai, Inc., moves for leave to file its second amended complaint 18 against alleged infringer SetSail Technologies, Inc. This motion is appropriate for disposition 19 on the papers, and the upcoming hearing is accordingly VACATED. Rule 15 dictates that leave 20 to amend shall be freely given when justice so requires. While not automatic, our court of 21 appeals has stated that the district courts should permit amendment with “extreme liberality.” 22 Jackson v. Bank of Hawai’i, 902 F.2d 1385, 1387 (9th Cir.1990) (citations omitted). 23 Considering the parties’ briefing and the lenient standard of Rule 15, People.ai’s motion 24 is GRANTED. This order notes, however, that it in no way blesses the reasons given by 25 People.ai for their inability to better frame their infringement allegations. In light of the 26 posture of this litigation, the parties shall proceed immediately to the patent showdown 27 procedure that the dismissal of the first amended complaint interrupted. Pursuant to Rule 16 1 1. By SEPTEMBER 13, 2021, patent owner and alleged infringer shall each select and 2 exchange one asserted claim — presumably the strongest case for infringement and 3 strongest case for noninfringement or invalidity, respectively. If patent owner wishes to 4 withdraw any claim, it must do so by SEPTEMBER 6. Otherwise, the alleged infringer is 5 free to select any asserted claim and it cannot be withdrawn thereafter. 6 2. The parties shall file cross motions for summary judgment on the two claims (one for 7 each party) selected for the patent showdown. The parties are limited to ONE MOTION 8 EACH REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF ISSUES RAISED, e.g. standing, invalidity, 9 noninfringement, etc. Opening briefs are limited to 25 PAGES of briefing and 120 PAGES 10 of declarations and exhibits (not counting the patent itself). The opposition must be 11 limited to 25 PAGES of briefing and 120 PAGES of declarations and exhibits. The reply 12 must be limited to 15 PAGES of briefing and 20 PAGES of declarations and exhibits. In the 13 case of voluminous documents and transcripts attached as exhibits, counsel may append 14 only the pages of the document necessary to support the assertions in the briefing and 15 provide reasonable context, along with cover pages sufficient to identify the documents. 16 Any judicially noticed material will count as an exhibit, but counsel may rely on exhibits 17 and declarations already filed on the same motion by the other side without counting 18 them against counsel’s limit. All briefing and declarations must be double-spaced with 19 twelve-point font with only occasional single-spaced quotes and footnotes. 20 3. For many years, the Court conducted a claim construction hearing about mid-way 21 through the fact-discovery period. While this timing gave some guidance to counsel and 22 experts, it had the distinct disadvantage of requiring abstract rulings without the benefit 23 of a more complete record, thus increasing the risk of a claim construction error and a re- 24 trial (and, for that matter, subsequent second appeal). Instead of a stand-alone claim 25 construction hearing, claims will be construed as-needed along with the parties’ motions 26 for summary judgment or at trial. Any proposed claim constructions shall be included in 27 the parties’ summary judgment briefs — no separate briefs will be accepted. In this way, 1 the Court will better understand the as-applied meaning of terms advanced by counsel as 2 claim constructions. 3 4. The parties’ opening briefs are due NOVEMBER 18, 2021. 4 5. The parties’ opposition briefs are due DECEMBER 13, 2021. 5 6. The parties’ reply briefs are due DECEMBER 20, 2021. 6 7. The motions will tentatively be heard on JANUARY 13, 2022 AT 8:00 A.M. 7 8. The above described “patent showdown” applies only to claims for direct infringement 8 for the specific showdown claims. The remainder of the patents and claims asserted by 9 plaintiff remain part of the case and the parties shall proceed per the Civil Local Rules 10 and the Patent Local Rules, meaning that both sides must continue to provide all 11 disclosures under the Patent Local Rules despite the parties’ showdown on the two 12 claims. To repeat: the pendency of the showdown does not suspend discovery and 13 disclosure obligations for the remainder of the claims for relief. 14 9. Ifsummary judgment fails to resolve the parties’ dispute over the claim(s) asserted in the 15 showdown, counsel should be prepared for a prompt trial on the remaining issues. a 16 IT IS SO ORDERED.

18 Dated: August 23, 2021 ls Pee 20 ~ WILLIAM ALSUP 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28