Opinion
C 20-06754 WHA
04-14-2022
GOOGLE LLC, Plaintiff, v. SONOS, INC., Defendant.
FURTHER ORDER RE PATENT SHOWDOWN PROCEDURE
WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The parties request further guidance regarding the patent showdown procedure (Dkt. No. 205). A further case management conference is not needed for the issues the parties have raised.
First, should an order deny either (or both) summary judgment motions, a trial on the issues remaining shall be set as follows:
• The final pretrial conference shall be on July 13 at 2:00 P.M.
• Jury selection shall occur on July 14.
• Opening statements and the beginning of evidence shall begin on July 18.
Second, the parties note that while the “scheduling order required Sonos to elect only a single asserted claim for the showdown procedure, it did not place any limits on Google on the number of prior art grounds it can assert.” The patent showdown scheduling order set out an expeditious procedure for each side to litigate one claim selected by that side all the way through trial (if need be). That is, each side may select one claim-in-suit. Google, for example, can select one claim asserted against it and contend it does not infringe or that the claim is invalid. Sonos, in turn, can select one claim and assert that Google has infringed. Both sides have the opportunity to present their side of each issue. The parity in the procedure is in the fact that each side gets one claim. There is no limit concerning references for validity or invalidity.
IT IS SO ORDERED.