Order 3 337-TA-853 Document ID: 490614 File ID: 782267

Pursuant to Commission Rule 2l0.51(a), a target date for completion of the

Investigation in the above-captioned matter must be set. See § 19 C.F.R. 210.5 l (a). Upon a review of the Complaint and the Notice of Investigation, and taking into account the

Administrative Law Judge’s commitments in other Investigations already instituted, the

Administrative Law Judge has determined that a target date exceeding sixteen months is

appropriate. There is no room in the Administrative Law Judge’s schedule for a ten-day

hearing until June of 2013. Adequate time must further be allocated for post-hearing briefing

and analysis. Accordingly, a target of January 6, 2014 is set for this Investigation. Based on

this target date, the final initial determination on violation in this Investigation will be due no

later than September 6, 2013.

In order that the proceeding in this matter may begin expeditiously, the parties are

directed to submit a discovery statement by September 21, 2012

In addition to the discovery statement, the parties also shall jointly file by September

21, 2012 a proposed procedural schedule that includes dates for each of the events set forth in Ground Rule 1.14. If the parties wish to deviate from the attached sample schedule when proposing dates, they should explain their rationale for the proposed changes in their

submission. Certain dates have already been set in the schedule below. The parties may not

alter the dates the Administrative Law Judge has already set forth below when proposing their schedule. '

With respect to the evidentiary hearing, the Administrative Law Judge anticipates an

optional technology tutorial to start at 9:00 a.m. on June 3, 2013 at a location to be announced

closer to the hearing date. The pre-hearing conference and hearing will commence in the same location immediately following the tutorials. The hearing shall conclude no later than June 14, 2013. The parties shall take these dates, and the other dates noted in Attachment A below, into consideration when proposing their procedural schedule.

The proposed schedule includes dates for three settlement meetings (Which will not

include the Administrative Law Judge) at a time, date, and location of the parties‘ choosing for the good faith exploration of settlement, by persons of requisite settlement authority, of some or all of the issues in the case. Unless the parties obtain the permission of the Administrative Law Judge, for good cause shown, the settlement meetings should not occur by video-conferencing or by teleconferencing. The first of the settlement meetings should be relatively early in the Investigation, the second should be approximately midway through the period for discovery, while the last should be set for the period between the close of discovery and before the commencement of the hearing. The parties should also include dates in the proposed schedule for filing the joint settlement conference reports.3

In addition, the parties are expected to identify patent priority dates, prior art, and solidify

their positions with respect to claim construction for the asserted patents early in the

Investigation. The proposed schedule provides dates for the submission of proposed claim

constructions for disputed claim terms. Absent a showing of good cause, the parties will be

bound by their proposed constructions for disputed claim terms on the date the joint submission of disputed claim terms is due. The parties may submit proposals on or before December 7, 2012 with their comments as to whether a Markman hearing at least two months in advance of the hearing would be useful in resolving disputed claim terms.