No such message found

Free
Message: Re: PACER...Gil/SILVER.....
11
Feb 19, 2010 05:43PM
5
Feb 19, 2010 06:27PM
5
Feb 19, 2010 08:21PM
11
Feb 19, 2010 10:17PM
8
Feb 19, 2010 10:41PM
14
Feb 19, 2010 11:34PM
1
Feb 20, 2010 09:37AM
3
Feb 20, 2010 10:37AM
4
Feb 20, 2010 11:36AM
3
Feb 20, 2010 12:22PM
2
Feb 20, 2010 12:23PM
3
Feb 20, 2010 12:37PM
4
Feb 20, 2010 12:44PM
9
Feb 20, 2010 12:45PM
4
Feb 20, 2010 12:49PM
6
Feb 20, 2010 12:53PM
4
Feb 20, 2010 01:01PM
5
Feb 20, 2010 01:25PM
3
Feb 20, 2010 01:43PM
6
Feb 20, 2010 02:13PM
7
Feb 20, 2010 02:14PM
7
Feb 20, 2010 02:14PM
5
Feb 20, 2010 04:10PM
8
Feb 20, 2010 05:38PM
2
Feb 20, 2010 08:07PM
8
Feb 20, 2010 08:53PM
6
Feb 20, 2010 09:44PM
7
Feb 20, 2010 09:52PM
5
Feb 20, 2010 10:08PM
1
Feb 21, 2010 10:20AM
8
Feb 21, 2010 01:06PM

Just re-read EDIG's proposed schedule (Doc 189 Exhibit E) and didn't see any reference to a Markman. Defendants want a Markman sometime after 9 June 10 as seen in Doc 189 Exhibit C. Remember, these are proposed schedules...not court ordered schedules.

-----

Paragraph 7.d. of Exhibit E is interesting:

Expert Witness Disclosure: e.Digital anticipates the use of expert testimony on the topics of (i) Defendants' infringement of the Patents-in-Suit and (ii) the damages caused by the Defendants' infringement of the Patents-in-Suit.

I seem to remember they weren't planning on calling any experts in the TX 7 case.

-----

Paragraph 8. of Exhibit E also interesting:

Settlement: The parties certify that, as required by Fed. R.Civ. P. 26(f), they have discussed the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case by alternative dispute resolution. e.Digital contends that mediation following an initial round of discovery may be productive.

3
Feb 21, 2010 01:23PM
7
Feb 22, 2010 08:28AM
3
Feb 22, 2010 09:16AM
6
Feb 22, 2010 10:41AM
5
Feb 22, 2010 11:01AM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply