Case 2:24-cv-00312-JRG-RSP Document 64 Filed 09/27/24 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 834
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DIGITALDOORS, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff
`
`v.
`
`CATHAY BANK,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`CASE NO. 2:24-cv-312-JRG-RSP
`LEAD CASE
`
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`
`FIRST AMENDED DOCKET CONTROL ORDER
`
`In accordance with the Unopposed Motion to Amend the Docket Control Order, (Dkt. No.
`
`63) it is hereby ORDERED that the following schedule of deadlines is in effect until further order
`
`of this Court:
`
`Date
`
`Amended Date
`
`Event
`
`March 16, 2026
`
`March 9, 2026
`
`March 6, 2026
`
`February 17, 2026
`
`February 10, 2026
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`*Jury Selection – 9:00 a.m. in Marshall, Texas
`
`*Defendant to disclose final invalidity theories, final
`prior art references/combinations, and final
`equitable defenses.
`
`*Plaintiff to disclose final election of Asserted
`Claims
`
`* 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.1
`
`*Pretrial Conference – 9:00 a.m. in Marshall,
`Texas before Judge Roy Payne
`
`
`1 The Parties are referred to the Court’s Standing Order Regarding Use of Juror Questionnaires in Advance of Voir
`Dire.
`- 1 -
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00312-JRG-RSP Document 64 Filed 09/27/24 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 835
`
`February 2, 2026
`
`February 2, 2026
`
`January 26, 2026
`
`January 20, 2026
`
`January 20, 2026
`
`January 12, 2026
`
`December 29, 2025
`
`December 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.
`
`*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
`
`*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, Shawn McRoberts, at
`shawn_mcroberts@txed.uscourts.gov
`
`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
`
`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
`
`*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.
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00312-JRG-RSP Document 64 Filed 09/27/24 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 836
`
`December 8, 2025
`
`December 1, 2025
`
`November 17, 2025
`
`October 27, 2025
`
`October 20, 2025
`
`October 14, 2025
`
`September 23, 2025
`
`September 9, 2025
`
`September 2, 2025
`
`August 26, 2025
`
`August 12, 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.
`
`Deadline to Complete Expert Discovery
`
`Serve Disclosures for Rebuttal Expert Witnesses
`
`Serve Disclosures for Expert Witnesses by the Party
`with the Burden of Proof
`
`Deadline to Complete Fact Discovery and File
`Motions to Compel Discovery
`
`Comply with P.R. 3-7 (Opinion of Counsel
`Defenses)
`
`*Claim Construction Hearing – 9:00 a.m. Marshall,
`Texas before Judge Roy Payne
`
`*Comply with P.R. 4-5(d) (Joint Claim Construction
`Chart)
`
`*Comply with P.R. 4-5(c) (Reply Claim
`Construction Brief)
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-5(b) (Responsive Claim
`Construction Brief)
`
`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).
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00312-JRG-RSP Document 64 Filed 09/27/24 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 837
`
`August 12, 2025
`
`July 29, 2025
`
`July 22, 2025
`
`July 8, 2025
`
`July 1, 2025
`
`June 10, 2025
`
`May 20, 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.
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-4 (Deadline to Complete Claim
`Construction Discovery)
`
`File Response to Amended Pleadings
`
`*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.
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-3 (Joint Claim Construction
`Statement)
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-2 (Exchange Preliminary Claim
`Constructions)
`
`Comply with P.R. 4-1 (Exchange Proposed Claim
`Terms)
`
`September 26, 2024 October 10,
`2024
`
`Comply with Standing Order Regarding Subject-
`Matter Eligibility Contentions2
`
`Comply with P.R. 3-3 & 3-4 (Invalidity
`September 26, 2024 October 10,
`Contentions)
`2024
`(*) 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.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`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]
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00312-JRG-RSP Document 64 Filed 09/27/24 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 838
`
`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 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)
`
`(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
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00312-JRG-RSP Document 64 Filed 09/27/24 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 839
`
`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. Other than as set forth in the above deadlines, the contentions of the Parties may
`not be amended, supplemented, or dropped without leave of the Court based upon a showing
`of good cause. The Parties in a case which has been consolidated for pre-trial purposes and
`which is moving towards a separate trial on the merits (subsequent to pre-trial) shall file, as an
`exhibit to the parties’ Joint Pretrial Order, a list identifying all docket entries from the lead
`case that relate to the applicable member case.
`
`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.
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`