Woodway USA, Inc. v. LifeCORE Fitness, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. California
DecidedNovember 20, 2023
Docket3:22-cv-00492
StatusUnknown

This text of Woodway USA, Inc. v. LifeCORE Fitness, Inc. (Woodway USA, Inc. v. LifeCORE Fitness, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Woodway USA, Inc. v. LifeCORE Fitness, Inc., (S.D. Cal. 2023).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 Case No.: 22CV492-JO (BLM) 10 WOODWAY USA, INC.,

11 Plaintiff, ORDER SETTING DEADLINES 12 v. 13 LIFECORE FITNESS, INC. dba Assault Fitness, 14 Defendant. 15

16 17 On August 23, 2022, the Court held an Early Neutral Evaluation Conference and Case 18 Management Conference in Patent Case. ECF No. 22. The case did not settle and on August 19 24, 2022, the Court issued a Case Management Order Regulating Discovery and Other Pretrial 20 Proceedings in a Patent Case. ECF No. 23. In the order, the Court stated that it “will issue an 21 order setting the remaining deadlines after the order on claim construction issues.” Id. at 3. 22 On November 14, 2023, Judge Ohta issued a Claim Construction Order. ECF No. 59. 23 Accordingly, the Court finds it appropriate to reset the remaining case deadlines as follows: 24 1. Not later than thirty (30) days after the filing of the Claim Construction Order, any 25 party relying upon advice of counsel as part of a patent-related claim or defense for any reason 26 must make the disclosures required by Patent LR. 3.7. See ECF No. 23 at 2-3. 27 2. A party asserting infringement must serve final amended infringement 28 contentions, within the meaning of Patent L.R. 3.6(a)(1), not later than thirty (30) days after 1 service of the Court’s Claim Construction Ruling. See ECF No. 23 at 3. 2 3. A party opposing a claim of infringement must serve final amended invalidity 3 contentions, within the meaning of Patent L.R. 3.6(b)(2), not later than fifty (50) days after 4 service of the Court’s Claim Construction ruling. See ECF No. 23 at 3. 5 4. All fact discovery shall be completed by all parties on or before March 1, 2024. 6 5. All expert disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) shall be served on all 7 parties on or before March 29, 2024. Any contradictory or rebuttal disclosures within the 8 meaning of Rule 26(a)(2)(D)(ii) shall be disclosed on or before April 26, 2024. Unless 9 otherwise stipulated by the parties, the required expert disclosures shall include an expert report 10 as required by Rule 26(a)(2)(B). If a written report is not required, the disclosure must provide 11 the information required under Rule 26(a)(2)(c). 12 6. All discovery, including expert discovery, shall be completed by all parties on or 13 before May 24, 2024. "Completed" means that all discovery under Rules 30-36 of the Federal 14 Rules of Civil Procedure, and discovery subpoenas under Rule 45, must be initiated a sufficient 15 period of time in advance of the cut-off date, so that it may be completed by the cut-off date, 16 taking into account the times for service, notice, and response as set forth in the Federal Rules 17 of Civil Procedure. 18 Counsel shall promptly and in good faith meet and confer with regard to all discovery 19 disputes in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(1) and Civil Local Rule 26.1(a). 20 All discovery motions must be filed within 30 days of the service of an objection, answer or 21 response which becomes the subject of dispute or the passage of a discovery due date without 22 response or production, and only after counsel have met and conferred and have reached 23 impasse with regard to the particular issue. The Court’s procedures for resolving discovery 24 disputes are set forth in Magistrate Judge Barbara L. Major’s Civil Chambers Rules, which are 25 posted on the Court’s website. A failure to comply in this regard will result in a waiver 26 of a party's discovery issue. Absent an order of the court, no stipulation continuing 27 or altering this requirement will be recognized by the court. 28 7. All other dispositive motions, including those addressing Daubert issues, shall be 1 FILED on or before June 21, 2024. Please be advised that counsel for the moving party must 2 obtain a motion hearing date from the law clerk of the judge who will hear the motion. Failure 3 of counsel to timely request a motion date may result in the motion not being heard. Motions 4 in Limine are to be filed as directed in the Local Rules, or as otherwise set by Judge Ohta. 5 8. Briefs or memoranda in support of or in opposition to any pending motion shall 6 not exceed twenty-five (25) pages in length without permission of the judge or magistrate judge 7 who will hear the motion. No reply memorandum shall exceed ten (10) pages without leave of 8 the judge or magistrate judge who will hear the motion. 9 9. A Mandatory Settlement Conference shall be conducted on January 30, 2024 at 10 9:30 a.m. via videoconference with Magistrate Judge Barbara L. Major. All discussions at 11 the Mandatory Settlement Conference will be informal, off the record, privileged, and 12 confidential. Counsel for any non-English speaking party is responsible for arranging for the 13 appearance of an interpreter at the conference. 14 a. Personal Appearance of Parties Required: All parties, adjusters for insured 15 defendants, and other representatives of a party having full and complete authority to enter into 16 a binding settlement, as well as the principal attorneys responsible for the litigation, must be 17 present via videoconference and legally and factually prepared to discuss settlement of the 18 case. Counsel appearing without their clients (whether or not counsel has been given settlement 19 authority) will be cause for immediate imposition of sanctions and may also result in the 20 immediate termination of the conference. 21 Unless there is good cause, persons required to attend the conference pursuant to this 22 Order shall not be excused from personal attendance. Requests for excuse from attendance for 23 good cause shall be made in writing at least three (3) court days prior to the conference. Failure 24 to appear at the Mandatory Settlement Conference will be grounds for sanctions. 25 b. The Court will use its official Zoom video conferencing account to hold the MSC. 26 IF YOU ARE UNFAMILIAR WITH ZOOM: Zoom is available on computers through a 27 download on the Zoom website (https://zoom.us/meetings) or on mobile devices through the 28 1 installation of a free app.1 Joining a Zoom conference does not require creating a Zoom account, 2 but it does require downloading the .exe file (if using a computer) or the app (if using a mobile 3 device). Participants are encouraged to create an account, install Zoom, and familiarize 4 themselves with Zoom in advance of the MSC.2 There is a cost-free option for creating a Zoom 5 account. 6 c. Prior to the start of the MSC, the Court will e-mail each MSC participant an 7 invitation to join a Zoom video conference. Again, if possible, participants are encouraged to 8 use laptops or desktop computers for the video conference, as mobile devices often offer inferior 9 performance. Participants shall join the video conference by following the ZoomGov Meeting 10 hyperlink in the invitation. Participants who do not have Zoom already installed on their 11 device will be prompted to download and install Zoom before proceeding when they 12 click on the ZoomGov Meeting hyperlink. Zoom may then prompt participants to enter the 13 password included in the invitation. All participants will be placed in a waiting room until the 14 MSC begins. 15 d. Each participant should plan to join the Zoom video conference at least five 16 minutes before the start of the MSC to ensure that the MSC begins promptly at 9:30 a.m. The 17 Zoom e-mail invitation may indicate an earlier start time, but the MSC will begin at 18 the Court-scheduled time. 19 e. Zoom’s functionalities will allow the Court to conduct the MSC as it ordinarily would 20 conduct an in-person MSC.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Woodway USA, Inc. v. LifeCORE Fitness, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woodway-usa-inc-v-lifecore-fitness-inc-casd-2023.