Integrated Circuit Systems, Inc. v. Realtek Semiconductor Co.

Good Law
308 F. Supp. 2d 1106·2004 WL 595049·2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4761
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 11, 2004C00-4035MMC(BZ)California709 words

Opinion

Opinion

Zimmerman, J.

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL SUPPLEMENTATION OF PATENT DISCLOSURES AND DENYING SANCTIONS

On May 24, 2001, plaintiff served its initial disclosures under Patent Local Rule 3-1 accusing two Realtek product families of infringing its patent. Thereafter, plaintiff learned that Realtek made additional product families which, plaintiff contends, also infringe its patent. Plaintiff did not supplement its initial disclosures to accuse these new products. After the disclosure process was complete and on the eve of the claim construction hearing, Realtek moved to compel plaintiff to supplement its initial disclosures with respect to these new products. The claim construction hearing occurred on April 1, 2002. A ruling has not yet issued.

Realtek is not contending that plaintiff has failed to supplement any discovery response pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e). Instead, Realtek contends that the duty to supplement applies to the disclosures required by Patent Local Rule 3-1. Patent L.R. 3-1 requires a party claiming patent infringement to provide a “Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Preliminary Contentions” to all parties within 10 days after the Initial Case Management…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.