TRADEMARK
`
`TO:
`
`Maik Stop 8
`TMrector uf the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1456
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1486
`
`REPORTON THE
`FEELING OR DETERMINATION OF AN
`ACTION REGARDING PATENTOR
`
`In Compliance with 35 § 290 and/or 15 U.S.C. $ 1116 vou are hereby advised that a court action has been
`Cl Patents or
`“! Trademarks:
`filed in the US. District Court Eastern Califorma on the following
`
`
`DOCKET NO.
`4:23-CV—-80006-ABA-HBK
`LATNTIFF
`
`DATE FILED
`Al23
`
`US Bistricl Court Eastern California
`Fresaa
`ERENDANT
`
`MATTHEWR. SWANSON,
`
`JUSTIN R HARRISON, ET AL,
`
`PATENT OR
`
`DATE OF PATENT
`
`HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK
`
`_OR TRADEMARK
`_TRADEMARK NQ.
`Howard Alexander Dumble
`1 2892356
`ctober 12, 2004
`
`2 2909913
`
`December 14, 2602
`
`
`
` Howard Alexander Dumble
`
`(BY} DEPUTY CLERK
`
`Tn the above-entitled case, the following decision has b en rendered or judgmentissucd:
`DECTION/JUDGMENT
`
`In the above-ontitled case the following patents(s) have boen included:
`
`DATEINCLUDED
`
`LINCLUDED BY
`Amendment
`
`PATENT OR
`TRADEMARK NO&.
`
`DATE OF PATENT
`OR TRADEMARK
`
`Cross Bill
`
`Other Pleadings
`
`HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK
`
`
`
`
`
`CLERE.
`
`

`

`Case D23-cv-00006-ADA-HBK Document i-D Fed 01/0423 Page 2 at?
`
`b.
`
`Remote Appearances
`
`Judge de Alba encourages telephonic or videoconference appearances. The parties may
`
`appear telephonically by dialing 1-888-557-8511 (access code 2219767) at the time of the hearing.
`
`Please be aware that the court may be hearing other matters using the same conferenceline, as such,
`
`wait to state your appearance until the court calls your case and requests it. Keep all background
`
`noise to a minimum. There will be no hybrid appearances: all persons in a single case must appear
`
`via the same format. If you intend to appear telephonically or via videoconference, you must inform
`
`Courtroom Deputy Mamie Hernandezat least 48 hoursprior to the hearing at
`
`MHernandez@caed.uscourts.gov and she will provide videoconference information to attorney(s).
`
`c.
`
`Briefing
`
`All moving and opposition briefs or legal memorandum must use Times New Romanfont
`
`size no smaller than 12. Footnotes shall be in typeface no more than onesize smaller than textsize.
`
`Unless the parties obtain prior leave of court, all moving and opposition briefs or legal
`
`memorandum in civil cases shall not exceed 20 pages. Reply briefs shall not exceed 10 pages.
`
`Only for good cause shown will the court grant an application to extend these page limitations.
`
`Briefs exceeding these limits without prior permission will not be considered. No supplemental
`
`bricfs shall be filed without prior leave of court. The partics arc required to notify the court if they
`
`are continuing to work toward settlement after submitting a motion.
`
`d.
`
`Meet and Confer Requirement
`
`Priorto filing a motion in a case where the parties are represented by counsel, counselshall
`
`engage in pre-filing mect and confer to thoroughlydiscuss the substance of the contemplated
`
`motion and any potential resolution. The parties are expected to resolve minor procedural or other
`
`non-substantive matters during the meet and confer process so that the briefing on motions that
`
`proceedsto hearing is directed only to those substantive issues requiring court resolution. Counsel
`
`filing the motion shall include a declaration that the partics exhausted mect and confer cfforts, with
`
`a very brief summaryofsaid efforts.
`
`Re
`
`i)
`
`Ww
`
`aN
`
`LA
`
`ON
`
`~]
`
`Co
`
`Oo
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`Milt
`
`28
`
`Milt
`
`

`

`Re
`
`ON
`
`~]
`
`Co
`
`Oo
`
`Case D23-cv-00006-ADA-HBK Document i-D Fed 01/0423 Page 3 af?
`
`e.
`
`Electronic Filing
`
`The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California requires electronic
`
`filing of documents in all new and pending civil cases in which parties are represented by counsel.
`
`A party proceeding without counsel may request authorization to file electronically. Information
`
`about the court’s Electronic Case Filing (‘ECF’) system is available on the court’s website at
`
`www.,caed.uscourts.gov/cemecf, See Local Rule 133.
`
`All manually filed documents, i.e., those documents excused from the electronic filing
`
`requirements by the Local Rules, shall be served in conformity with the applicable Federal Rules of
`
`Civil Procedure or Local Rule 133.
`
`f.
`
`ourtesy
`
`Copies
`
`The parties are ordered to deliver to the Clerk’s Office clearly marked courtesy copies of
`
`all electronically filed documents that exceed twenty-five (25) pages, and conformed courtesy copies
`
`of all manually filed documents, by either personally delivering them or sending them via guaranteed
`
`overnight delivery without signature required upon receipt. See Local Rule 133(f). There is no need
`
`to provide courtesy copies of answers or shorter pleadings.
`
`
`
`g. ProposedOrders
`
`Judge de Alba docs not require the partics to submit proposcd orders with motionsto
`
`dismiss or motions for summary judgementbut does require the parties to provide proposed consent
`
`decrees and proposed findingsof fact. If the court does direct the parties to file a proposed order,
`
`the party should submit it as required by Local Rule 137(b) and email it in Microsoft Word format
`
`to adaorders @ cacd_.uscourts.gov.
`
`h.
`
`Ex Parte Applications
`
`Ex Parte Applications are typically not heard but are submitted to the court unless the court
`
`notifies the parties otherwise. Thefiler is required to contact Judge de Alba’s Courtroom Deputy
`
`and the opposing party prior to filing the application to advise that they are making such a request.
`
`Documents in support of the Ex Parte Application mustinclude an affidavit indicating a satisfactory
`
`explanation for the following:
`
`(1) the need for issuance of such an order, (2) the filer’s inability to
`
`Milt
`
`

`

`Re
`
`i)
`
`Ww
`
`ON
`
`~]
`
`Co
`
`Oo
`
`Case 1:23-cv-00006-ADA-HEK Documents-I Fied O1/G4/23 Page 4 of 7
`
`obtain a stipulation for the issuance of such an order from the other parties on the caption, and (3)
`
`why such request cannot be noticed on the court’s motion calendar as provided by Local Rule 230.
`
`1.
`
`Discovery Matters and other Magistrate Judge Referrals
`
`All discovery matters and other duties the Magistrate Judge performs pursuant to Local
`
`Rule 302 shall be noticed before the assigned Magistrate Judge unless the court orders otherwise.
`
`The assigned Magistrate Judge may modify a discovery cutoff if, in their discretion, an extension
`
`of that cutoff is warranted to allowfor resolution of a discovery dispute.
`
`j.
`
`Pagination of Exhibits
`
`Multi-page exhibits shall be internally paginated with the pagination for each exhibit
`
`beginning with the number one; reference to those exhibits shall refer to the exhibit designation
`
`and page number, Le., Ex. A at 7, Ex. B at 1, etc.
`
`k.
`
`TROsand Injunctions
`
`Parties seeking emergencyor provisionalrelief shall comply with Federal Rule of Civil
`
`Procedure 65 and Local Rule 230. The court typically will not rule on any application for such
`
`relief for at least twenty-four (24) hoursafter the party subject to the order requested has been
`
`served; such party may file opposing or responding papers in the interim. The parties shall lodge
`
`a courtesy copy with chambersofall papers related to proposed TROs and injunctions, conformed
`
`to reflect that they have beenfiled.
`
`L
`
`Sealing and Protective Orders
`
`No documentwill be sealed, nor shall a redacted documentfiled, without prior approval of
`
`the court. If a document for which scaling or redaction is sought relates to the record on a motion
`
`Judge de Albais set to decide, the request to seal shall be directed to her and not the assigned
`
`Magistrate Judge. All requests to seal or redact shall be governed by Local Rules 141 (sealing) and
`
`140 (redaction); protective orders covering the discovery phase shall not govern the filing of sealed
`
`or redacted documents on the public dockct. The court will only consider requests to seal or redact
`
`filed by the proponentof sealing or redaction. If a party plans to makea filing that includes material
`
`an opposing party has identified as confidential and potentially subject to sealing, the filing party
`
`Milt
`
`

`

`Re
`
`i)
`
`Ww
`
`ON
`
`~]
`
`Co
`
`Oo
`
`Case 1:23-cv-00006-AD4-HBK Document t-1 Fhed oU/G4/e3 Page Sof?
`
`shall provide the opposing party with sufficient notice in advanceoffiling to allow the party to
`
`seek an order from the court regarding sealing or redacting the material in question.
`
`2.
`
`SETTLEMENT CONFERENCES
`
`Settlement conferences are mandatory and are scheduled at times mutually convenient to
`
`the court, counsel, and the parties. See Local Rule 270. Judge de Alba expects the parties to
`
`meaningfully work toward settlement and may continuetrial to allow for the parties to continue
`
`working toward settlement where appropriate.
`
`3.
`
`TRANSCRIPT ORDERS
`
`If you would like to order a transcript, please contact the court reporter who covered the
`
`hearing directly. Contact information for individual court reporters may be found on the U.S. District
`
`Court’s website.
`
`4.
`
`FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCES
`
`Cases in which Judge de Alba is conducting the Final Pretrial Conference, the parties are
`
`required to file a Joint Pretrial statement seven days (7) before the Final Pretrial Conference hearing
`
`date. Parties must email the Joint Pretrial statement as a Microsoft Word document to
`
`adaorders @caed.uscourts. gov.
`
`5.
`
`TRIALS
`
`a.
`
`Jury Selection
`
`Judge de Alba utilizes the following methodforjury selection. The court first conducts voir
`
`dire, then allows short voir dire by counsel, and then ascertains if any potential juror will be excused
`
`for causc. If a potential juror is excused for causc, a new nameis selected and that person is voir
`
`dired before jury selection continues. Once voir dire is completed and the Judge has ruled on all
`
`challenges for cause, the Courtroom Deputywill provide the attorneys with a strike sheet to exercise
`
`their peremptory challenges. Once the peremptory challenges are marked, the Judge excuses those
`
`jurors until the desired numberof jurors remain.
`
`b.
`
`Presumptive Trial Hours
`
`Subject to adjustment based onthe other court calendars, Judge de Alba’s presumptivetrial
`
`hours are Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, 8:30 a.m. — 12:00 p.m. and again from 1:30 p.m. —
`
`5
`
`

`

`Re
`
`i)
`
`Ww
`
`ON
`
`~]
`
`Co
`
`Oo
`
`Case D23-cv-00006-ADA-HBK Document i-D Fed 01/0423 Page 6 af 7
`
`4:30 p.m. and dark on Fridays. Lunch on full days is 12:00 p.m. — 1:30 p.m., and breaks on other
`
`days are at approximately 10:15 a.m. and 2:45 p.m.
`
`c.
`
`Electronic Equipment
`
`Judge de Alba’s courtroom is currently equipped with the following equipment:
`
`(1) ELMO;
`
`(2) video cable hook-ups(3) large projector screen; (4) laptop hook-ups; and (5) monitors in the
`
`jury box, witness stand, and at counsel table. The courthouse also has a projector available.
`
`Counsel should contact the Courtroom Deputy, Mamie Hernandez, at least two weekspriorto trial
`
`to verify that the equipmentis available and in good working order. Counselis also expected to
`
`meet with the Courtroom Deputy the day before the first dayof trial to view the courtroom and
`
`learn how to connect to and use any of the courtroom’s electronic equipment. Time will not be
`
`provided during the trial should the parties fail to avail themselves of this opportunity.
`
`d.
`
`Exhibit and Witness Lists
`
`The parties shall email the Courtroom Deputycopies of exhibit and witness lists in
`
`Microsoft Word format by the Thursday priorto thefirst day of trial via the following email
`
`address: MHernandez@caed.uscourts.gov. Exhibitlists shall be in table format and include two
`
`columnson the right side of the table, one labeled “offered” and the last labeled “admitted.”
`
`c.
`
`Deposition Transcripts
`
`Counsel must lodge the sealed original copy of any deposition transcript to be usedattrial
`
`with the Clerk’s office no later than fourteen (14) days beforetrial.
`
`f.
`
`Use of Conference Rooms During Trial
`
`Conference roomsare available on cither side of the courtroom (out in the hallway) for use
`
`duringtrial.
`
`g.
`
`Jury Instructions
`
`The parties should reviewthe court’s standard jury instructions noted belowand submit
`
`only their proposed modification of these instructions along with any spccial instructions.
`
`¢
`
`¢
`
`«
`
`Prisoner Pro Se Civil Jury Instructions (Preliminary)
`
`Prisoner Civil Jury Instructions (Preliminary)
`
`Civil Pro Se Jury Instructions (Preliminary)
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case D23-cyv-O0006-ADA-HBK Document i-D Fed 01/0423 Page 7 at?
`
`be
`
`i)
`
`Ww
`
`«
`
`Civil Pro Se Jury Instructions (Final
`
`Civil Jury
`
`Instructions (Prelimin:
`
`«
`
`Civil Jury
`
`Instructions (Final
`
`6.
`
`NOTICE OF THIS ORDER
`
`Counsel for plaintiff shall immediately serve this order on all parties, including any new
`
`parties added to the action in the future, unless this case came to the court by noticed removal, in
`
`which case defendantshall serve this order onall other parties.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`DATED:
`
`January4, 2023
`
`wet.BE
`
`ANA de ALBA
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00006-ADA-HBK Documentti-2 Filed O1/G4/2a Page Taf 4
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERNDISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`501 I STREET, SUITE 15-220
`SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
`
`Chambers of
`KIMBERLY J. MUELLER
`Chief United States District Judge
`
`(916) 930-4260
`
`Magistrate Judge Consent in Civil Cases: Know Your Rights!
`
`Delay, congestion, uncertainty, and expense are concerns often expressed bycivillitigants. These
`concerns have reached a crisis level in the Eastern District of California.
`
`Despite the population of our District nearly doubling since 1979 and a corresponding tremendous
`increase in case filings, for the past 40 years our court has only 6 authorized District Judgeship
`positions. The U.S. Judicial Conference, the policy-making arm ofthe federal courts, has
`recommended for decades that Congress authorize between 5 and 11 new judgeshipsforthis court.
`While the court is doing whatit can to ensure Congress is fully informed regarding our current proposed
`allocation of 5 newjudgeships, we cannotat this point say there is a realistic hope of new District
`Judgeships in the foreseeable future.
`
`Compounding our challenges, while we have welcomed one new District Judge as of December 2021,
`we continue to have one vacancy amongour 6 authorized judgeships. The Sacramento Division
`has experienceda net loss of one District Judge’s services, with Senior District Judge Garland E.
`Burrell’s taking inactive senior status and District Judge Morrison C. England’s taking active senior
`status and reducing his caseload. Our Fresno courthouse has been even harder hit, with former
`Chief District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill's taking inactive senior status at the end of January 2020;
`for nearly two years the Fresno District Court operated with only one active Article II judge to
`handle all criminal cases and a heavyshare of civil cascs, and onc senior Article IIT judge whoassists
`the court by taking a half civil caseload. The Eastern District has been significantly congested for
`many years, consistently carrying average weighted caseloads equal or close to twice the national
`average for federal trial courts. Given our current more dire circumstances, civil litigants are having to
`vie for less and less District Judge time andattention. Civil litigants therefore may wish to consider
`consenting to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction, given that the court has a full complement of experienced
`Magistrate Judges available to preside to the full extent allowed by law.
`
`The Magistrate Judge consent process can help bring about the “just, speedy, and inexpensive
`determination" of federal cases. Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. Althoughtheir title has changed periodically,
`Magistrate Judges, as they currently are known, have hada rolc in the federal courts since passage
`of the Judiciary Act of 1789, Over time, Congress has expanded and enhancedthe position in the
`interests of maximizing judicial efficiency. Specifically, Magistrate Judges are authorized "to conduct
`any orall proceedings in a jury or non—jurycivil matter and order the entry of judgmentin the case"
`with the consentof the parties. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Consent can maximize access to the courts and
`ease court congestion through effective use of judicial resources. It can provide numerous benefits to
`litigants including the prospect of an early and firm trial date, when District Judges may not be
`available to try a civil case given the needto prioritize felony criminal cases.
`
`In civil cases, the assigned Magistrate Judge already is responsible for resolving discovery disputes,
`deciding other non—dispositive motions and in some instances handling pre-trial proceedings; as a
`result that judge may be intimately familiar with the case history. Consenting in any civil case allows
`the Magistrate Judge to decide dispositive motions and preside overtrial, and so can avoid the
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00006-ADA-HBEK Documentti-2 Filed O1/G4/2a Page 2 af 4
`
`uncertainty partics may face while waiting for the District Judge to identify time on his or her calendar
`for trial. Just as with a judgmentissued by a District Judge, a judgment issued by a Magistrate Judge
`to whom the parties in a civil case have consented is appealable directly to the Ninth Circuit Court
`of Appeals.
`
`Astheir professional biographies posted on our court's website show, our Magistrate Judges are
`well—qualified to preside overthe cases assigned them. They are experienced, high—caliber judges
`with diverse experiences in civil and criminal litigation who have been selected on the merits, taking
`into account their education, experience, knowledge of the court system, personal attributes and other
`criteria. Our Magistrate Judges are well—qualified to preside over the civil cases brought in our court.
`
`To consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction, a party simply signs and files a consent form. The form is
`available on the court’s website, at this link:
`
`http://www.caed.uscourts. gov/caednew/index.cfm/forms/civil/.
`
`Parties may consent or withhold consent without any adverse consequences. Onceall parties to a
`case consent, then the assigned District Judge is notified and considers whcther to approve the consent.
`Oncethe District Judge accepts, then the Magistrate Judge determines whether to accept consent
`jurisdiction, taking the opportunity to consider any conflicts or bases for recusal.
`
`All litigants before the federal courts deserve justice delivered in a fair, prompt, and efficient manner.
`Our Magistrate Judgesplay a critical role in providing essential access to justice, particularly in our
`overburdened court. Consenting to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction in civil cases may represent one of
`the best ways to secure "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination" of your case, which is why we
`want to be sure you are fully aware of your right and ability to consent, and the means of doing so.
`
`
`
`ICT JUDGE
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00006-ADA-HBEK Documenti-2 Filed O1/G4/2a Page 3 af 4
`
`NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF A MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`TO EXERCISE JURISDICTION AND APPEAL INSTRUCTIONS
`
`Youare hereby notified in accordance with 28 U.S.C §636(c), F.R.Civ.P.73 and Local Rule 305,
`
`the United States Magistrate Judgessitting in Sacramento and Fresno are available to exercise the
`
`court's case—dispositive jurisdiction and to conduct any orall case—dispositive proceedingsin this
`
`action, including motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, a jury or non jurytrial, and entry
`
`of a final judgment. Excercise of this jurisdiction by a Magistrate Judge is however, permitted only if
`
`all parties voluntarily consent. You may, without adverse substantive consequences, withhold your
`
`consent, but this will prevent the court's case—dispositive jurisdiction from being exercised by a
`
`Magistrate Judge.
`
`Any appeal from a judgment cntcred by a Magistrate Judgeis taken directly to the United States
`
`Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit or, where appropriate, for the Federal Circuit in the same
`
`manneras an appeal from any other judgmentof a District Court.
`
`Whetheror not the parties consent pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the assigned Magistrate Judge
`
`will hearall motions except those case—dispositive motions set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A).
`
`A copy of the Form for "Consent to / Decline of Jurisdiction of United States Magistrate Judge"
`
`is attached hereto for pro per use and attorney information. This form is available in fillable .pdf format
`
`on the court's web site at www.caed.uscourts.gov for all attorney ECFfilers. This form may be filed
`
`through CM/ECForbyproselitigants at the appropriate Clerk's Office location.
`
`Office of the Clerk
`
`501 I Street, Room 4-200
`Sacramento, CA 95814
`
`Office of the Clerk
`
`2500 Tulare Street, Suite 1501
`Fresno, CA 93721
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00006-ADA-HBK Documenti-2 Filed O1/G4/2a Page 4 af 4
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERNDISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`MATTHEW R. SWANSON ,
`Plaintiff(s) / Petitioner(s),
`
`VS.
`
`CASE NO: 1:23-CV-00006-ADA-HBK
`
`CONSENT/ DECLINEOFUSS.
`MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION
`
`JUSTIN R HARRISON, ET AL. ,
`Defendant(s) / Respondent(s).
`
`CONSENT TO JURISDICTION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`In accordance with the provisions of Title 28, U.S.C Sec. 636(c)(1), the undersigned
`hereby voluntarily consents to have a United States Magistrate Judge conductall further
`proceedings in this case, includingtrial and entryof final judgment, with direct review by
`the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in the event an appealis filed.
`
`
`
`Signature:
`
`Print Name:
`
`
`
`Counsel for
`
`) Defendant / Respondent
`(
`) Plaintiff / Petitioner
`(
`
`*
`
`
`
`DECLINE OF JURISDICTION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`Pursuant to Title 28, U.S.C. Sec 636(c)(2), the undersigned acknowledges the
`availability of a United States Magistrate Judge but hereby declines to consent.
`
`
`
`Signature:
`
`Print Name:
`
`Counselfor
`
`
`
`(
`
`) Plaintiff / Petitioner
`
`(
`
`) Defendant / Respondent
`*
`
`*Jfrepresenting more than one party, counsel must indicate the name of each party responding.
`
`

`

`Case bS¢-cv(006-ADS-HBK Document Filed O1/0d/23 Page I af 7
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`MATTHEWR. SWANSON,
`
`Case No. 1:23-CV-00006-ADA-HBK
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`ORDER SETTING MANDATORY
`SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
`
`v.
`JUSTIN R HARRISON, ET AL.,
`
`DATE: April 6, 2023
`
`TIME: 10:00 AM
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA
`U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`/
`
`Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires the Court to enter a Case
`
`Management and Scheduling Order “‘as soon aspracticable.”! Therefore, it is ORDEREDallparties
`
`shall appearat a telephonic Scheduling Conference (dial-in number: 1-888-204-5984; passcode
`
`4446176) before United States Magistrate Judge Helena M. Barch-Kuchtaat the above time and
`
`date. Attendance at the Scheduling Conference is mandatory for all parties and should last no longer
`
`than thirty (30) minutes. Counsel shall appear for represented parties. An unrepresented party must
`
`appear personally.
`
`The Court cannot conduct the Scheduling Conference until the defendant has been served with
`
`the summons and complaint. Plaintiff shall promptly file proof of service of the summonsand
`
`complaint. E.D. Cal. L.R. 210. Plaintiff shall comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, regarding the requirement
`
`Milt
`
`'This Order refers to the parties in the singular regardless of the numberofparties identified in the
`complaint.
`
`e b
`
`o
`
`Ww
`
`wn
`
`a ~
`
`~
`
`oO
`
`Oo
`
`

`

`Case (:23-cv-00006-ADA-HBK Docurnentt-3 Filed O1/O4d/23 Page i of i
`
`TO:
`
`Mail Stop 8
`Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`TRADEMARK
`
`REPORT ON THE
`FILING OR DETERMINATIONOF AN
`ACTION REGARDING PATENT OR
`
`In Compliance with 35 § 290 and/or 15 U.S.C. § 1116 you are hereby advised that a court action has been
`
`filed in the U.S. District Court Eastern California on the following
`
`Patents or *Trademarks:
`
`DOCKETNO.
`1:23-CV-00006-ADA-HBK
`PLAINTIFF
`
`DATE FILED
`1/4/23
`
`US District Court Eastern California
`Fresno
`DEFENDANT
`
`MATTHEWR. SWANSON,
`
`JUSTIN R HARRISON,ET AL.,
`
`PATENT OR
`
`DATE OF PATENT
`
`HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK
`
`TRADEMARKTense ORTRADEMARK
`1ose October 12, 2004
`
`2 2909913
`
`December 14, 2002
`
`Howard Alexander Dumble
`
`Howard Alexander Dumble
`po
`(BY) DEPUTY CLERK
`
`eo
`
`In the above—entitled case the following patents(s) have been included:
`
`DATE INCLUDED
`
`PATENT OR
`TRADEMARKNO.
`
`.
`INCLUDED BY
`mo
`i Amendment
`DATEOF PATENT
`OR TRADEMARK
`
`.
`-
`Other Pleadings
`i!
`“Cross Bill
`HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK
`
`In the above—cntitled case, the following decision has becn rendered or judgmentissucd:
`
`DECISIONNUDGMENT
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00006-ADA-HBK Docurmentt-4 Filed O1/O4d/23 Page i of 2
`
`NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY
`
`VOLUNTARYDISPUTE RESOLUTION
`
`Pursuantto the findings and directives of Congress in 28 U.S.C. §§ 651 et seq., and in recognition
`of the economic burdensand delay in the resolution of disputes that can be imposed by full formal
`litigation, Local Rule 271 governsthe referral of certain actions to the Voluntary Dispute Resolution
`Program ("VDRP") at the election of parties. Plaintiff or removing party is to provideall other parties
`with copics of the notice at the time service is effected or, for partics already scrved, no more than fourteen
`(14) days after receiving notice from the Court. After filing of the original complaint or removalaction,
`any party who causes a new party to be joined in the action shall promptly serve a copy of the notice on
`the newparty.
`
`It is the Court's intention that the VDRPshall allow the participants to take advantage of a wide
`variety of alternative dispute resolution methods. These methods mayinclude, butare not limited to,
`mediation, negotiation, early neutral evaluation and settlementfacilitation. The specific method or
`methods cmployed will be determined by the Neutral and the partics.
`
`PLEASE TAKE NOTICEthat pursuant to Local Rule 271, this Local Rule applies to all civil
`actions pending before any District Judge or Magistrate Judge in the District except that actions in the
`following categories are exempt from presumptive inclusion: (i) prisonerpetitions and actions, including
`habeas corpuspetitions, (ii) actions in which oneofthe parties is appearing pro se, (il) voting rights
`actions, (iv) social security actions, (v) deportation actions, (vi) Freedom ofInformation Act actions, and
`(vii) actions involving the constitutionality of federal, state or local statutes or ordinances.
`Thefact that a
`case falls in a categorythat is exempt from the presumptive applicability of this Local Rule neither (1)
`precludesthe parties to such a case from agreeing to participate in an Alternative Dispute Resolution
`("ADR") process, nor (2) deprives the Court of authority to compel participation in an appropriate ADR
`proceeding.
`
`Parties may elect Voluntary Dispute Resolution with the Court indicating that all parties to the
`action agree to submit the action to VDRP pursuant to Local Rule 271. Actions maynot be assigned to
`VDRPoverthe objection of a party. (Copy of sample stipulation attached hereto.) At the timeoffiling, a
`copyof the stipulation shall be provided to the VDRP Administrator designated below:
`
`Sacramento Cases
`Voluntary Dispute Resolution
`Program Administrator
`United States District Court
`501 "I" Street, Suite 4-200
`Sacramento, CA 95814
`(916) 930-4278
`
`Fresno Cases
`Voluntary Dispute Resolution
`Program Administrator
`United States District Court
`2500 Tulare Street, Suite 1501
`Fresno, CA 93721
`(559) 499-5600
`
`

`

`Case [:23-cv-00006-ADA-HBK Docurentt-4 Filed O1/Od/23 Page 2 of 2
`
`— N
`
`o
`
`ww
`
`& w
`
`n a ~
`
`]
`
`Oo
`
`Ko]
`
`UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURT
`
`EASTERNDISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`MATTHEW R. SWANSON,
`
`NO: 1:23-—CV-00006—ADA-HBK
`
`Plaintiff(s)
`
`v.
`
`JUSTIN R HARRISON , ET AL.,
`
`Defendant(s)
`
`STIPULATION TO ELECT REFERRAL
`OF ACTION TO VOLUNTARYDISPUTE
`RESOLUTION PROGRAM (VDRP)
`PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE271
`
`Pursuant to Local Rule 271, the parties hereby agree to submit the above—entitled action to
`
`the Voluntary Dispute Resolution Program.
`
`DATED:
`
`JANUARY 4, 2023
`
`Name:
`Attorneyfor Plaintiff(s)
`
`Name:
`Attorney for Defendant(s)
`
`

`

`Case bs¢-cv(0006-ADS-HBK Document Filed OV/0d/23 Page 2 af 7
`of timely serving the complaint. Failure to timely serve the summons and complaint may result in the
`
`imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of unserved defendants.
`
`Due to Rule 16 mandates, the Court serves this Order upon plaintiff before appearances of the
`
`defendant are due. The Court ORDERSplaintiff to serve a copy of this Order on the defendant, or, if
`
`identified, on their counsel, upon receipt of this Order, and to file an appropriate proof of service with
`
`the Court. E.D. Cal. L.R. 135.
`
`Expectation for the Rule 26(f) Conference & Rule 26(f)(3) Discovery Plan
`
`Atleast twenty-one (21) days prior to the mandatory Scheduling Conference, and when
`
`reasonably feasible, the parties are urged to include at least one in-person meeting of the parties or
`
`their counsel during the Rule 26(f)(2) process to prepare the Joint Scheduling Report. Because the
`
`parties must employ the federal and local rules to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition
`
`of this action (see Fed. R. Civ. P. 1; 16(c)(2)(P)), the partics must thoughtfully consider the
`
`proportional needs of this case given the claims, defenses, and other considerations in Rule 26(b)(1),
`
`and meaningfully discuss all issues identified in Rules 16(b)(3), 16(c)(2), 26()(2) and 26(1)(3).
`
`The parties must file a Joint Scheduling Report no later than two (2) full weeks prior to the
`
`Scheduling Conference. The Joint Scheduling Report shall indicate the date and time of the Scheduling
`
`Conference opposite the caption on the first page of the Report. The Joint Scheduling Report shall
`
`e b
`
`o
`
`Ww
`
`wn
`
`a ~
`
`~
`
`oO
`
`Oo
`
`include:
`
`1.
`
`A brief summary of the factual contentions (e.g., uncontested and contested facts), and
`
`legal contentions(e.g., disputed and undisputed positions, jurisdiction, and venue), set forth in the
`
`pleadings of each party, including the relief sought by any party presently before the Court.
`
`2.
`
`A complete and detailed discovery and pretrial plan addressing the following components,
`
`and including agreed dates or specifying where there is a disagreement:
`
`2A template in word of the Joint Scheduling Reportis available on Judge Helena M. Barch-Kuchta’s
`Chamber’s Page under “Standard Forms.”
`
`If a party refuses to participate in preparing the Joint Scheduling Report, the non-offending party shall
`detail the party’s effort to get the offending party to participate. The non-offending party shall still file the
`report two (2) full weeks prior to the Scheduling Conference andlist the non-offending party’s proposed
`dates. Absent good cause presented by the offending party prior to the Scheduling Conference, the dates
`proposed by the non—offending party will be presumedto be the dates jointly offered by the parties. The
`offending party may be subject to sanctions, including monetary sanctions, to compensate the non-
`offending party’s time and effort incurred in seeking compliance in drafting the Joint Scheduling Report.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case i:
`a. 23-cy-GO006-ADS-HBEK Document @ Filed 01/04/23 Page 3 of 7
`Date for the exchange of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) initial disclosures or the date
`
`disclosures were completed;
`
`Proposed deadline for amendments to pleadings, and if an amendmentis
`
`anticipated, a general description of the proposed amendment,e.g., additional
`
`parties, adding/removing claims;
`
`Firm cut-off date for non-expert discovery;4
`
`Firm date for disclosure of expert witnesses as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2),
`
`e b
`
`o
`
`Ww
`
`a w
`
`n a ~
`
`~
`
`oO
`
`Oo
`
`and a date for any supplemental expert disclosures;
`
`Firm cut-off date for expert witness discovery;
`
`Any proposed changesin the limits on discovery imposed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b);
`
`30(a)(2)(A), (B); 30(d); or 33(a);
`
`Whetherthe parties anticipate the need for a protective order relating to the
`
`discovery of information relating to a trade secret or other confidential information,
`
`research, development, or commercial information;
`
`Anyissues or proposals relating to the timing, sequencing, phasing, or scheduling
`
`of discovery;
`
`Whetherthe parties anticipate the need to take discoveryoutside the United States
`
`and, if so, a description of the proposed discovery;
`
`Whether any party anticipates video and/or sound recording of depositions;
`
`Date for filing non-dispositive and dispositive pre-trial motions, with the
`
`understanding that motions (except motions in limine or othertrial motions) will not
`
`be entertained after the agreed upon date;
`
`Pre-trial conference date; and
`
`Trial date.
`
`Mit
`
`* The Court follows the rule that the completion date meansthat all discovery must be finished by the
`deadline set in the Rule 16 Case Management and Scheduling Order. Litigants—by their own agre