Opinion
2:22-cv-02095-JAD-DJA
08-03-2023
SIGNIFY NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION and SIGNIFY HOLDING B.V. Plaintiffs, v. LEPRO INNOVATION INC, LE INNOVATION INC, INNOVATION RULES INC., HOME EVER INC., and LETIANLIGHTING, INC., Defendants.
F. Christopher Austin WEIDE & MILLER, LTD. Jeremy P. Oczek (Pro hac vice) BOND, SCHOENECK & KING, PLLC Jonathan L. Gray (Pro hac vice) BOND, SCHOENECK & KING, PLLC One Lincoln Center COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS Signify North America Corporation and Signify Holding B.V. Hua Chen (by permission) GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP Hua Chen (Pro hac vice) SCIENBIZIP, P.C. COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS LEPRO Innovation Inc., LE Innovation Inc., Innovation Rules Inc., Home Ever Inc., and Leitianlighting, Inc.
F. Christopher Austin WEIDE & MILLER, LTD. Jeremy P. Oczek (Pro hac vice) BOND, SCHOENECK & KING, PLLC Jonathan L. Gray (Pro hac vice) BOND, SCHOENECK & KING, PLLC One Lincoln Center COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS Signify North America Corporation and Signify Holding B.V.
Hua Chen (by permission) GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP Hua Chen (Pro hac vice) SCIENBIZIP, P.C. COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS LEPRO Innovation Inc., LE Innovation Inc., Innovation Rules Inc., Home Ever Inc., and Leitianlighting, Inc.
ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO INCREASE PAGE LIMITS FOR PARTIES' CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEFS and SETTING RELATED HEARINGS ECF Nos. 48, 51
Jennifer A. Dorsey U.S. District Judge
The parties, Plaintiffs Signify North America Corporation and Signify Holding B.V. (collectively, “Signify”), and Defendants LEPRO Innovation Inc., LE Innovation Inc, Innovation Rules Inc., Home Ever Inc., and Leitianlighting, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”), jointly move (“Joint Motion”) to increase the page limits for the parties' respective claim construction briefs.
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
This is a patent infringement action. In this case, Signify accuses Defendants of infringing seven (7) patents directed to various aspects of LED lighting technologies.
Pursuant to the Patent Local Rules and the Scheduling Order (Docket No. 37), the parties submitted a Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement (Docket No. 48) in which there are a total of seventeen (17) claim terms/phases for construction by the Court.
As detailed in the Declaration of Jeremy P. Oczek filed in support of this Joint Motion (“Oczek Decl.”), given the number of claim terms/phases that need to be briefed and the number of patents-in-suit, the parties jointly request that the Court allow parties to file claim construction briefs with the following page limits:
| Plaintiffs' opening claim construction brief | 50 pages |
| Defendants' responsive claim construction brief | 60 pages |
| Plaintiffs' reply claim construction brief | 25 pages |
In accordance with Local Rule 7-3(c), the parties respectfully submit that good cause exists to increase the page limits for the parties' respective claim construction briefs as there are a total of seven (7) patents-in-suit and seventeen (17) claim terms/phases that the parties submit need to be construed by the Court. See, Oczek Decl., ¶¶ 2-5. The parties respectfully believe that the requested increased page limits will greatly assist the Court in resolving the claim construction issues.
WHEREFORE, for good cause shown, it is requested that the Court allow: (1) 50 pages for Plaintiffs' opening claim construction brief; (2) 60 pages for Defendants' responsive claim construction brief; and (3) 25 pages for Plaintiffs' reply claim construction brief.
ORDER
With good cause appearing, IT IS ORDERED that the joint motion [ECF No. 51] is GRANTED; the page limits are increased as set forth in this motion.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Claim Construction Tutorial will take place in Courtroom 6D of the Lloyd D. George U.S. Courthouse in Las Vegas, Nevada, on 10/16/23 at 1:30 p.m. Each side will have one hour.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Claim Construction Hearing will take place in the same courtroom on 10/17/23 at 9 a.m. Each side will have 3.5 hours.