`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`Case No. 2:19-cv-00311-JRG-RSP
`
`§§§§§§§§§
`
`GREE, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SUPERCELL OY,
`
`Defendant.
`
`SIXTH AMENDED DOCKET CONTROL ORDER
`
`Before the Court is the Joint Motion to Amend Docket Control Order (“Motion”) filed by
`
`Plaintiff GREE, Inc. and Defendant Supercell Oy (collectively, the “Parties”). Dkt. No. 93. The
`
`Parties’ Motion seeks to amend the Docket Control Order and move the close of fact discovery by
`
`five (5) days and move other deadlines, including the dispositive motions deadlines by
`
`approximately the same number of days. The deadlines for the pretrial conference and jury
`
`selection are unaffected. Further, the Parties note minimum spacing between responses to
`
`dispositive motions and the pretrial conference set forth in this Court’s earlier orders has been
`
`preserved. Dkt. No. 93 at 3.
`
`After due consideration, the Court GRANTS the Motion. It is therefore ORDERED that
`
`the following schedule of deadlines is in effect until the Court orders otherwise:
`
`Prior Date
`
`New Date
`
`Event
`
`March 1, 2021
`
`*Jury Selection – 9:00 a.m. in Marshall, Texas
`
`1 / 5
`
`Supercell
`Exhibit 1018
`Page 1
`
`
`
`Case 2:19-cv-00311-JRG-RSP Document 94 Filed 10/23/20 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 1879
`
`Prior Date
`
`New Date
`
`Event
`
`February 1, 2021
`
`January 25, 2021
`
`January 20, 2021
`
`January 19, 2021
`
`January 11, 2021
`
`January 13, 2021
`
`*Notify Deputy Clerk in Charge regarding the
`date and time by which juror questionnaires
`shall be presented to accompany by jury
`summons if the Parties desire to avail
`themselves the benefit of using juror
`questionnaires.1
`
`*Pretrial Conference – 9:00 a.m. in Marshall,
`Texas before Judge Roy Payne
`
`*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.
`
`*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.
`
`Deadline to file Sur-Replies in Opposition to
`Dispositive Motions, Motions to Strike Expert
`Testimony, and Daubert Motions.
`
`*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.
`
`1 The Parties are referred to the Court’s Standing Order Regarding Use of Juror Questionnaires in Advance of Voir
`Dire.
`
`2 / 5
`
`Supercell
`Exhibit 1018
`Page 2
`
`
`
`Case 2:19-cv-00311-JRG-RSP Document 94 Filed 10/23/20 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 1880
`
`Prior Date
`
`New Date
`
`Event
`
`January 7, 2021
`
`January 7, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`January 6, 2021
`
`December 22, 2020 December 23, 2020
`
`December 22, 2020 December 23, 2020
`
`December 22, 2020
`
`December 14, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`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.
`
`Serve Objections to Rebuttal Pretrial
`Disclosures.
`
`Deadline to file Replies in Support of
`Dispositive Motions, Motions to Strike Expert
`Testimony, and Daubert Motions.
`
`*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
`CV-7(e), not to exceed the deadline as set forth
`in this Docket Control Order.2 Motions for
`Summary Judgment shall comply with Local
`Rule CV-56.
`
`*Response to Motion to Strike Expert
`Testimony (including Daubert Motions)
`
`Serve Objections to Pretrial Disclosures; and
`Serve Rebuttal Pretrial Disclosures.
`
`Serve Pretrial Disclosures (Witness List,
`Deposition Designations, and Exhibit List) by
`the Party with the Burden of Proof.
`
`
`2 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.
`
`3 / 5
`
`Supercell
`Exhibit 1018
`Page 3
`
`
`
`Case 2:19-cv-00311-JRG-RSP Document 94 Filed 10/23/20 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 1881
`
`Prior Date
`
`New Date
`
`Event
`
`December 8, 2020
`
`December 9, 2020
`
`December 8, 2020
`
`December 9, 2020
`
`*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.
`
`*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.
`
`December 4, 2020
`
`December 7, 2020
`
`Deadline to Complete Expert Discovery
`
`November 19, 2020 November 24, 2020
`
`Serve Disclosures for Rebuttal Expert
`Witnesses
`
`October 28, 2020
`
`November 2, 2020
`
`Serve Disclosures for Expert Witnesses by the
`Party with the Burden of Proof
`
`
`
`October 23, 2020
`
`Deadline to Complete Fact Discovery and File
`Motions to Compel Discovery
`(*) indicates a deadline that cannot be changed without showing 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
`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
`
`4 / 5
`
`Supercell
`Exhibit 1018
`Page 4
`
`
`
`Case 2:19-cv-00311-JRG-RSP Document 94 Filed 10/23/20 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 1882
`
`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.
`
`Motions for Continuance: The following excuses will not warrant a continuance nor
`justify a failure to comply with the discovery deadline:
`
`(a)
`
`(b)
`
`(c)
`
`The fact that there are motions for summary judgment or motions to dismiss pending;
`
`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;
`
`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.
`
`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.
`
`5 / 5
`
`Supercell
`Exhibit 1018
`Page 5
`
`
`
`Case 2:19-cv-00311-JRG-RSP Document 94 Filed 10/23/20 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 1883
`
`
`
`6 / 5
`
`____________________________________
`ROY S. PAYNE
`UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`SIGNED this 3rd day of January, 2012.
`
`SIGNED this 23rd day of October, 2020.
`
`Supercell
`Exhibit 1018
`Page 6
`
`
`
`Case 2:19-cv-00311-JRG-RSP Document 96 Filed 10/26/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 1885
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`GREE, INC.,
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SUPERCELL OY,
`
` Defendant.
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`Case No. 2:19-cv-00311-JRG-RSP
`
`ORDER
`
`The parties in this case filed a Joint Motion to Amend the Docket Control Order, Dkt.
`
`No. 93, which the Court granted, Dkt. No. 94. In accordance with the parties’ request, the Court
`
`makes the following correction to its previous Order :
`
`Original Date
`
`New Date
`
`Event
`
`October 23, 20201
`
`October 28, 2020
`
`Deadline to Complete Fact Discovery
`
`October 23, 2020
`
`October 30, 2020
`
`Deadline to File Motions to Compel Discovery
`
`1 The parties agree that, after July 30, 2020, neither party will serve new written discovery or deposition notices in the
`-200 or -237 proceedings to each other or to third parties, unless warranted based on information learned after July
`30, 2020, from written discovery or completing depositions that have already been served or noticed by one of the
`parties in those cases or good cause otherwise exists. The parties further agree that nothing herein precludes the parties
`from receiving responses to discovery that has already been served.
`
`____________________________________
`ROY S. PAYNE
`UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`SIGNED this 3rd day of January, 2012.
`
`SIGNED this 25th day of October, 2020.
`
`Supercell
`Exhibit 1018
`Page 7
`
`