Under Plaintiff’s proposal, Plaintiff can change the asserted patent claims and accused

products on an ongoing basis – leaving the scope of the case unknown. Plaintiff also proposes a

“two phase” discovery plan that is, in effect, just one long discovery period, with two distinct

sets of depositions -- a set of depositions to be taken during the “claim construction” phase, and

another set of depositions (perhaps even duplicative) to be taken during the “post-claim

construction” phase, which follows immediately after the “claim construction” phase of

discovery. Finally, Plaintiff attempts to stall until July 15, 2010 the initial discussion as to

whether a Markman Hearing is even necessary, declining to propose any Markman dates despite

having previously been involved in a case where the parties disputed the meaning of many terms

in the patents. Defendants contend that a Markman Hearing and claim construction is essential