Case number 1:20-cv-01501
eBuddy Technologies B.V. v. LinkedIn Corporation > Documents
| Date Field | Doc. No. | Description (Pages) |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 1, 2025 | 307 | ORAL ORDER: In light of the parties' stipulation, (D.I. 306 ), the pending motions, (D.I. 236 ; D.I. 258 ; D.I. 279 ; D.I. 280 ; D.I. 281 ; D.I. 282 ; D.I. 290 ; D.I. 291 ; D.I. 292 ; D.I. 293 ; D.I. 294 ; D.I. 295 ), are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to renew, if the stay is ever lifted. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 12/01/2025. (sam) (Entered: 12/01/2025) (0) |
| Nov 18, 2025 | 306 | STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Stay All Deadlines Pending Final Settlement Agreement and Dismissal by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 11/18/2025) (2) |
| Oct 30, 2025 | 305 | STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order regarding Summary Judgment and Daubert Response and Reply Briefs by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 10/30/2025) (2) |
| Oct 7, 2025 | 297 | REDACTED VERSION of 283 Opening Brief in Support,, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 10/07/2025) (0) |
| Oct 7, 2025 | 298 | REDACTED VERSION of 284 Declaration,, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits 1-22)(Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 10/07/2025) (0) |
| Oct 7, 2025 | 299 | REDACTED VERSION of 285 Declaration by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 10/07/2025) (24) |
| Oct 7, 2025 | 300 | REDACTED VERSION of 276 Opening Brief in Support, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/07/2025) (30) |
| Oct 7, 2025 | 301 | REDACTED VERSION of 277 Declaration by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/07/2025) (30) |
| Oct 7, 2025 | 302 | REDACTED VERSION of 278 Declaration by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/07/2025) (30) |
| Oct 7, 2025 | 303 | REDACTED VERSION of 287 Opening Brief in Support by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/07/2025) (24) |
| Oct 7, 2025 | 304 | REDACTED VERSION of 288 Declaration by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/07/2025) (25) |
| Oct 6, 2025 | 296 | STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME (i) for the parties to respond to motions for summary judgment and Daubert motions and (ii) to file their replies to (i) 11/4/2025 and (ii) 11/25/2025 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 10/06/2025) (2) |
| Oct 3, 2025 | 290 | MOTION for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement re 276 [SEALED] OPENING BRIEF - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/03/2025) (3) |
| Oct 3, 2025 | 291 | MOTION for Summary Judgment of Invalidity Under 35 U.S.C. § 101 re 276 [SEALED] OPENING BRIEF - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/03/2025) (3) |
| Oct 3, 2025 | 292 | MOTION for Summary Judgment of Invalidity Under 35 U.S.C. § 112 re 276 [SEALED] OPENING BRIEF - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/03/2025) (3) |
| Oct 3, 2025 | 293 | MOTION to Preclude the Testimony of Messrs. Walter Bratic and Phillip Brida re 287 [SEALED] OPENING BRIEF - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/03/2025) (4) |
| Oct 3, 2025 | 294 | MOTION to Preclude the Testimony of Dr. Larry Chiagouris re 287 [SEALED] OPENING BRIEF - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/03/2025) (4) |
| Oct 3, 2025 | 295 | MOTION to Preclude the Testimony of Dr. Rajeev Surati re 287 [SEALED] OPENING BRIEF - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/03/2025) (4) |
| Oct 1, 2025 | 289 | ORAL ORDER: For the Court's administrative purposes, the Court hereby ORDERS that by no later than October 3, 2025, Defendant shall file individual one-page motions for each motion/ground that it raises in its motion for summary judgment and Daubert motion. (D.I. 275 ; D.I. 286 ) Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/01/2025. (sam) (Entered: 10/01/2025) (0) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 275 | MOTION for Summary Judgment of Invalidity Under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 112, and for Non-Infringement - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (3) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 276 | [SEALED] OPENING BRIEF in Support re 275 MOTION for Summary Judgment of Invalidity Under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 112, and for Non-Infringement - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 10/14/2025. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (0) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 277 | [SEALED] DECLARATION of Christopher Kao re 276 Opening Brief in Support, - by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits 1-8)(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (0) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 278 | [SEALED] DECLARATION of Philip Greenspun re 276 Opening Brief in Support, - by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits 9-11)(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (0) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 279 | MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment on Indefiniteness - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (2) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 280 | MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment on Written Description - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (2) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 281 | MOTION to Preclude Certain Opinions of Defendant's Expert Dr. Phillip Greenspun - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Rule 7.1.1 Certification)(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (0) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 282 | MOTION to Preclude Certain Opinions of Defendant's Expert Shelly Irvine - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Rule 7.1.1 Certification)(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (0) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 283 | [SEALED] OPENING BRIEF in Support re 279 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment on Indefiniteness, 282 MOTION to Preclude Certain Opinions of Defendant's Expert Shelly Irvine, 281 MOTION to Preclude Certain Opinions of Defendant's Expert Dr. Phillip Greenspun, 280 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment on Written Description filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 10/14/2025. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Certificate of Service)(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (0) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 284 | [SEALED] DECLARATION of Stephen F. Schlather re 283 Opening Brief in Support,, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14, # 15 Exhibit 15, # 16 Exhibit 16, # 17 Exhibit 17, # 18 Exhibit 18, # 19 Exhibit 19, # 20 Exhibit 20, # 21 Exhibit 21, # 22 Exhibit 22, # 23 Certificate of Service)(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (0) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 285 | [SEALED] DECLARATION of Dr. Rajeev Surati re 283 Opening Brief in Support,, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (0) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 286 | MOTION to Preclude the Testimony of Plaintiff's Expert Witnesses - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (4) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 287 | [SEALED] OPENING BRIEF in Support re 286 MOTION to Preclude the Testimony of Plaintiff's Expert Witnesses filed by LinkedIn Corporation.Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 10/14/2025. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (0) |
| Sep 30, 2025 | 288 | [SEALED] DECLARATION of Christopher Kao re 287 Opening Brief in Support - by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits 1-19)(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 09/30/2025) (0) |
| Aug 7, 2025 | 273 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Dr. Philip Greenspun on 8/14/2025 (Amended) filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 08/07/2025) (2) |
| Aug 7, 2025 | 274 | NOTICE of Withdrawal of Counsel by LinkedIn Corporation (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 08/07/2025) (2) |
| Aug 4, 2025 | 270 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Dr. Philip Greenspun on 8/12/2025 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 08/04/2025) (2) |
| Aug 4, 2025 | 271 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Dr. Philip Greenspun on 8/27/2025 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 08/04/2025) (2) |
| Aug 4, 2025 | 272 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Shelly Irvine on 8/25/2025 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 08/04/2025) (2) |
| Jul 30, 2025 | 266 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Dr. Larry Chiagouris on August 4, 2025 filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Cucuzzella, Lucinda) (Entered: 07/30/2025) (3) |
| Jul 30, 2025 | 267 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Dr. Rajeev Surati on August 5, 2025 filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Cucuzzella, Lucinda) (Entered: 07/30/2025) (3) |
| Jul 30, 2025 | 268 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Walter Bratic on August 13, 2025 filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Cucuzzella, Lucinda) (Entered: 07/30/2025) (3) |
| Jul 30, 2025 | 269 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Dr. Rajeev Surati on August 21, 2025 filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Cucuzzella, Lucinda) (Entered: 07/30/2025) (3) |
| Jul 8, 2025 | 265 | STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Modify the Scheduling Order - by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 07/08/2025) (2) |
| May 29, 2025 | 264 | NOTICE of Withdrawal of Counsel by LinkedIn Corporation (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 05/29/2025) (2) |
| May 14, 2025 | 259 | REDACTED VERSION of 251 Letter - by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 05/14/2025) (4) |
| May 14, 2025 | 260 | REDACTED VERSION of 252 Declaration - by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 05/14/2025) (4) |
| May 14, 2025 | 261 | REDACTED VERSION of 255 Letter - by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 05/14/2025) (4) |
| May 14, 2025 | 262 | REDACTED VERSION of 256 Letter by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 05/14/2025) (3) |
| May 14, 2025 | 263 | REDACTED VERSION of 257 Declaration by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 05/14/2025) (20) |
| May 8, 2025 | 256 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Reply Letter re: Source Code Discovery Dispute - re 247 Letter. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 05/08/2025) (0) |
| May 8, 2025 | 257 | [SEALED] DECLARATION of David Znidarsic re 256 Letter by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 05/08/2025) (0) |
| May 8, 2025 | 258 | MOTION for Discovery Dispute Resolution - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 05/08/2025) (1) |
| May 1, 2025 | 253 | REDACTED VERSION of 247 Letter by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-D)(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 05/01/2025) (0) |
| May 1, 2025 | 254 | REDACTED VERSION of 248 Declaration by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 05/01/2025) (4) |
| May 1, 2025 | 255 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding Discovery Dispute - re 247 Letter. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 05/01/2025) (0) |
| Apr 28, 2025 | 249 | REDACTED VERSION of 244 Letter, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits 1-6)(Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 04/28/2025) (0) |
| Apr 28, 2025 | 250 | REDACTED VERSION of 245 Declaration by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 04/28/2025) (16) |
| Apr 28, 2025 | 251 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding Reply in Support of Motion to Strike Plaintiff's New Infringement Contentions and Expert Reports - re 244 Letter,. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 04/28/2025) (0) |
| Apr 28, 2025 | 252 | [SEALED] Supplemental DECLARATION of Nandeesh Channabasappa Rajashekar re 251 Letter by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 04/28/2025) (0) |
| Apr 24, 2025 | 247 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Discovery Dispute. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 04/24/2025) (0) |
| Apr 24, 2025 | 248 | [SEALED] DECLARATION of David Znidarsic re 247 Letter by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 04/24/2025) (0) |
| Apr 23, 2025 | 246 | STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Modify the Scheduling Order by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 04/23/2025) (2) |
| Apr 21, 2025 | 244 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Response to Defendant's Motion to Strike - re 236 MOTION to Strike Plaintiff's Supplemental Infringement Contentions and Expert Reports. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6)(Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 04/21/2025) (0) |
| Apr 21, 2025 | 245 | [SEALED] DECLARATION of David Znidarsic re 244 Letter, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 04/21/2025) (0) |
| Apr 17, 2025 | 243 | ORAL ORDER: The Court has reviewed the parties' April 16, 2025 letter requesting a discovery dispute teleconference regarding a discovery dispute. (D.I. 242 ) It hereby ORDERS as follows with regard to this dispute: (1) By April 24, 2025, any party seeking relief shall file a letter, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining the issues in dispute and its position on those issues.; (2) By May 1, 2025, any party opposing the application for relief shall file a letter, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining that party's reasons for its opposition.; (3) By May 8, 2025, the party seeking relief shall file a reply letter brief, not to exceed one (1) single-spaced page, in no less than 12-point font.; (4) By May 8, 2025, with respect to each dispute, the moving party shall file a Motion To Resolve Discovery Dispute.; (5) The parties should also consult and follow Judge Burke's "Guidelines for Discovery Disputes," which is found in the "Guidelines" tab on Judge Burke's portion of the District Court's website.; (6) The Court will plan to resolve the disputes on the papers, unless: (a) it determines after reviewing the briefing that oral argument is needed; or (b) any party advises the Court in advance that, were argument to be set, a newer attorney will argue the disputes, see Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities for Newer Attorneys, https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/StandingOrder2017.pdf. If either of those circumstances, occurs, then the Court will schedule oral argument on the disputes in the future. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 04/17/2025. (sam) (Entered: 04/17/2025) (0) |
| Apr 16, 2025 | 242 | Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Request for Discovery Teleconference. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 04/16/2025) (1) |
| Apr 3, 2025 | 241 | STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME (i) for Plaintiff to respond to LinkedIn Corporation's Motion to Strike and (ii) for Defendant to file its reply in support of its Motion to Strike to (i) 4/21/2025 and (ii) 4/28/2025 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 04/03/2025) (2) |
| Apr 2, 2025 | 239 | REDACTED VERSION of 237 Letter, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Cucuzzella, Lucinda) (Entered: 04/02/2025) (30) |
| Apr 2, 2025 | 240 | REDACTED VERSION of 238 Declaration by LinkedIn Corporation. (Cucuzzella, Lucinda) (Entered: 04/02/2025) (5) |
| Mar 27, 2025 | 236 | MOTION to Strike Plaintiff's Supplemental Infringement Contentions and Expert Reports - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 03/27/2025) (5) |
| Mar 27, 2025 | 237 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding motion to strike - re 236 MOTION to Strike Plaintiff's Supplemental Infringement Contentions and Expert Reports. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-J)(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 03/27/2025) (0) |
| Mar 27, 2025 | 238 | [SEALED] DECLARATION of Nandeesh Rajashekar re 236 MOTION to Strike Plaintiff's Supplemental Infringement Contentions and Expert Reports by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 03/27/2025) (0) |
| Mar 10, 2025 | 235 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of (i) Supplemental Expert Report of Walter Bratic and Phillip Brida; (ii) Supplemental Expert Report of Dr. Rajeev Surati Regarding LinkedIn's Infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,230,135 and 8,402,179; and (iii) Supplement Expert Report of Dr. Larry Chiagouris filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 03/10/2025) (2) |
| Mar 6, 2025 | 234 | Official Transcript of Markman Hearing held on 3/16/2022 before Judge Christopher J. Burke. Court Reporter/Transcriber Michele Rolfe, Email: Michele_Rolfe@ded.uscourts.gov. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or order/purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date, it may be obtained through PACER Redaction Request due 3/27/2025. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/7/2025. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/4/2025. (sam) (Entered: 03/06/2025) (164) |
| Mar 4, 2025 | 231 | ORAL ORDER: With regard to the parties’ pending renewed motions for claim construction, (D.I. 162 ; D.I. 163 ), the Court now addresses the construction of term 4: “alternative title.” The parties’ dispute with respect to this term is whether it means “text that replaces a title” (Defendant’s proposal), or whether it is so clearly tied to the titlebar and taskbar that it must be construed as “text that replaces a title in the titlebar or taskbar” (as Plaintiff proposes). (D.I. 96 at 18 (emphasis added); id. at 19; Tr. at 91, 93-94, 96-97) The Court agrees with Defendant here, and will construe the term to mean “text that replaces a title” for the following reasons: (1) In support of its proposal, Plaintiff cites to a description of an embodiment in the 135 patent. (D.I. 96 at 19) The excerpt states that the “title can be used to notify users of certain events by changing the title.... [t]he changing of the text in the taskbar and/or titlebar may stand out from other taskbars and/or with fixed texts”; it proceeds to provide examples of how to replace the title associated with the titlebar, as depicted in Figures 4 and 5 of the patent. (135 patent, cols. 6:13-7:21 (emphasis added)) But as Defendant points out, this excerpt does not reference the term “alternative title” at all; that term appears only in the patent’s claims. (D.I. 96 at 19, 23; Tr. at 96-97, 101-102; Defendant’s Markman Hearing Presentation, Slide 39) The Court thus cannot agree with Plaintiff that this is an example of the patentee acting as its own lexicographer to define “alternative title,” (D.I. 96 at 19, 21), since there is no evidence that the patentee “clearly set forth a definition of the disputed claim term[,]” Cont’l Cirs. LLC v. Intel Corp., 915 F.3d 788, 796 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). And otherwise, as the Court has already noted, (see D.I. 229 ), it would be error to import a limitation into a claim term simply because the patent states that one embodiment of the invention includes that limitation.; and (2) The Court also agrees with Defendant that Plaintiff’s proposed construction would seem to render certain claim language in the 135 patent redundant. (D.I. 96 at 20, 23) Claim 1 of the 135 Patent recites “associating the event notification with... a plurality of character strings for provisioning for display in a titlebar or taskbar of a display device” and “using the alternative title as a title in association with the process.” (135 patent, col. 12:46-49, 55-56) However, other relevant claims, like claim 1 of the 179 patent, reference the use of an “alternative title as a title” in an event notification process—without specifically stating that such a title is used in a titlebar or taskbar. (179 patent, col. 12:46-56) As Defendant argues, then, in the context of the 135 patent, “saying that the alternative title by [] itself must be placed in a title[bar] or task[bar] renders meaningless or superfluous the requirement in [] claim 1 that [the title] be placed in the title[bar] or task[bar].” (Tr. at 99, see also id. at 94-95, 97-98, 101-02, 104)It is disfavored to adopt a construction that would render portions of a claim redundant, see Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Actavis, Inc., Civil Action No. 12-366-RGA-CJB, 2013 WL 6142747, at *4 (D. Del. Nov. 21, 2013) (citing cases), and the Court will not do so here. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 03/04/2025. (sam) (Entered: 03/04/2025) (0) |
| Mar 4, 2025 | 232 | ORAL ORDER: With regard to the parties’ pending renewed motions for claim construction, (D.I. 162 ; D.I. 163 ), the Court now addresses the construction of term 5, which relates to the order of the 6 steps in claim 1 of the 135 patent. The Court declines to construe the term at this time for the reasons that follow: (1) A specific order of steps is appropriate as to a method claim where: (a) the claim language, as a matter of logic or grammar, requires that the steps be performed in the order written,see Mformation Techs., Inc. v. Rsch. in Motion Ltd., 764 F.3d 1392, 1398 (Fed. Cir. 2014); or (b) where the claim implicitly requires an order, for example, if the language of a claimed step refers to the complete results of a prior step,see Kaneka Corp. v. Xiamen Kingdomway Grp. Co., 790 F.3d 1298, 1306 (Fed. Cir. 2015). That said, unless the steps of a method claim actually implicitly or explicitly indicate that such an order is required, the steps are not ordinarily construed to require one. See Interactive Gift Express, Inc. v. Compuserve Inc., 256 F.3d 1323, 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2001).; (2) In its opening brief, Plaintiff appeared to argue that step 1 must come before step 2, that step 2 must come before step 3, that step 3 must come before step 4, that step 4 must come before step 5 and that step 5 must come before step 6. (D.I. 96 at 64) For the reasons Plaintiff explained, (id.), that seemed a logical argument to the Court. In its answering brief, Defendant stated that “if Plaintiff is arguing that each and every full step should be construed to require the order in which the limitations are listed in Claim 1 of the 135 Patent[,]” (id. at 65), then it agreed with Plaintiff’s position. And it seemed like thatwaswhat Plaintiff had been arguing (the Court is not sure how its argument in its opening brief could mean anything else).; (3) But in its reply brief, Plaintiff made a “vague[] and inconsist[ent]” argument, (id. at 66), which was hard to understand, and seemed to suggest that Plaintiff was retracting some portion of its prior argument (without saying why, or explaining why its former position was wrong).; and (4) The Court is not going to do claim construction in the dark, and so it will decline to construe the term now. If the term is still in dispute as of 21 days prior to the start of summary judgment briefing, the parties shall advise the Court of this via a joint letter, and also let the Court know if the term is expected to be in dispute in the summary judgment briefing. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 03/04/2025. (sam) (Entered: 03/04/2025) (0) |
| Mar 4, 2025 | 233 | ORAL ORDER: With regard to the parties’ pending renewed motions for claim construction, (D.I. 162 ; D.I. 163 ), the Court now addresses the construction of term 6, which relates to the order of the 7 steps in claim 1 of the 179 patent. The Court declines to construe the term at this time for the reasons that follow: (1) The parties’ arguments for term 6 were brief, a little hard to follow, and (in Defendant’s case) pretty conclusory. (D.I. 96 at 66-68); (2) From what the Court can discern, Plaintiff seems to be arguing that steps 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7 of the claim must be performed in that order (but maybe that steps 3 and 6 don’t have to be performed in any order). (Id. at 66-67) And Defendant only seems to specifically make argument to the effect that steps 6 or 7 do not have to come after any of the prior steps. (Id. at67) But again, in light of the state of the briefing here, even this is hard to tell for sure.;(3) For what it is worth, if all that is really in dispute is whether step 7 must come after step 5, the Court is inclined to agree with Plaintiff that this must be so, because “the alternative title is used as an alternative to the title used in step [5.]” (Id. at 68) But given the uncertainty and vagueness in the briefing, the Court will not make a final construction at this time, as it prefers to do so on a clear record.; and (4) If the term is still in dispute as of 21 days prior to the start of summary judgment briefing, the parties shall advise the Court of this via a joint letter, and also let the Court know if the term is expected to be in dispute in the summary judgment briefing. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 03/04/2025. (sam) (Entered: 03/04/2025) (0) |
| Mar 3, 2025 | 228 | ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties’ pending renewed motions for claim construction, (D.I. 162 ; D.I. 163 ), having considered the legal standards related to claim construction,see Vytacera Bio, LLC v. CytomX Therapeutics, Inc., Civil Action No. 20-333-LPS-CJB, 2021 WL 4621866, at *2-3 (D. Del. Oct. 7, 2021), and having previously held aMarkmanhearing, (hereafter, “Tr.), hereby addresses the construction of term 1: “event.” It does so as follows: (1)In the parties’ briefing, one central point of contention was whether Plaintiff’s primary construction (“[a] detectable condition of a system that can trigger a notification”) meant that a systemmustrespond to all events in some fashion. Defendant thought it did, and argued that there is no support for such a position. (D.I. 96 at 5) But during theMarkmanhearing, Plaintiff confirmed (and the parties seemed to thereafter agree) that the word “can” as used Plaintiff’s proposal means just that: that in response to an event, a systemcantrigger a notification, but is not required to. (Tr. at 10-11, 17-18, 20-21, 26-27) This understanding of the term is supported by both intrinsic and extrinsic evidence.(See 135 patent, col. 6:6-8 (“When an event, message, or other data is available to the client, the titlebar [] may change to show information about the event.”); D.I. 123 , ex. O at ex. A at 198 (dictionary definition stating that “event” means “[a]n action or occurrence, often generated by the user, to which a program might respond—for example, key presses, button clicks, or mouse movements”);see also D.I. 123 , ex. K at ¶ 28); (2) This left the parties with one potential remaining dispute. Plaintiff asserted that an event is capable of triggering only anotification, as opposed to some other type of response. (Tr. at 14 (Plaintiff’s counsel arguingthat “an event has a certain type of result, which is the notification[;] it’s not just any response, it’s a notification that is the response”)) Defendant countered that “[e]vents do not need to trigger notifications[,]” rather, “[a]n event in a system can trigger other responses by the system further processing or other actions[;]” in other words, the event “does not need to result in a notification.” (Id. at 22) By way of example, Defendant’s counsel suggested that in a system like the one at issue, an event (like a “button click or a mouse click”) might not result in a notification, but instead in some other act (like “moving the cursor”). (Id.at 24) The parties discussed this dispute at length in the briefing and at the Markman hearing. (See D.I. 96 at 3, 5, 7, 10; Tr. at 12-17, 21-22, 29-32) By the end of the Markman hearing, it was a bit unclear to the Court as to whether the parties actually had a real disagreement about this aspect of the construction. (Tr. at 33, 34-36) But to the extent they do, (see D.I. 165 at 2), the Court sides with Defendant. Of the numerous dictionary definitions supplied by the parties regarding “event,” there were some—including some provided by Plaintiff, (D.I. 123 , exs. M, N), and one provided by Defendant that was generated by Microsoft, the maker of the operating system depicted in the patents, (id., ex. O at ex. A at 198)—that did not facially appear to require that an event could only result in a notification. This supports Defendant’s broader proposal on this point, as it suggests that in the relevant timeframe, there was not necessarily unanimity that a notification is the only type of response that could be triggered by an “event” in this context. (Id.; see also D.I. 165 at 3 (citing id., ex. B at 14-15)); and (3) In light of the above,the Court construes “event” to mean “an action or occurrence detectable by the computer that can trigger a system response, which can include a notification.” Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 03/03/2025. (sam) (Entered: 03/03/2025) (0) |
| Mar 3, 2025 | 229 | ORAL ORDER: With regard to the parties’ pending renewed motions for claim construction, (D.I. 162 ; D.I. 163 ), the Court now addresses the construction of term 2: “titlebar.” The parties have two disputes regarding this term, which the Court will take up below, and will thereafter offer a construction: (1) First, the parties dispute whether the information a titlebar displays need always contain only the “name of the window” (as Defendant suggests), or whether it must always display “information about the [related] application, typically its name or active process” (as Plaintiff suggests). (D.I. 96 at 10; Tr. at 46, 74) Here the Court sides with Defendant for two reasons: (a) Plaintiff largely relied on two extrinsic dictionary definitions in support of its position. (D.I. 96 at 10-11, 14; D.I. 123, exs. G, Q) But even assuming that these definitions (from dictionaries that are undated or that post-date the relevant time period) are viable here, (see D.I. 123, ex. U at paras. 4-5, 8), they are not of great help to Plaintiff. That is because another scientific dictionary definition from Microsoft in the relevant time period (provided by Defendant), (see D.I. 228), does not suggest that a titlebar must always display information about the “application”—instead it simply notes that a titlebar “contains the name of the window[,]”(D.I. 123, ex. O at ex. A at 522).; and (b) Defendant confirmed that its proposal is broader than Plaintiff’s—in that “name of the window” can refer to “text that relates to the particular application or program that the window is displaying” but can also instead simply be “text about … some other event[.]” (Tr. at 53-54, 57; see also id. at 67) Plaintiff’s proposal, then, is the narrower one. (Id. at 67, 73) And, absent some evidentiary reason to do otherwise, a court should typically give a claim term its full breadth (as supported by the claim’s wording and the patent’s written description). See Tonal Sys. v. iFit Inc., Civil Action No. 20-1197-GBW-CJB, 2023 WL 3089920, at *6 (D. Del. Apr. 26, 2023) (citing cases). Because the extrinsic dictionary definitions suggest that allowing for the broader construction is the correct call, the Court will do so here.; (2) As to the second dispute, in the briefing, it seemed like Plaintiff was arguing that titlebar must always display “buttons for minimizing, maximizing or closing the window displaying the application”—and that Defendant was arguing that a titlebar need not always have such buttons to begin with (let alone always display them).(D.I. 96 at 10-12; Tr. at 76) Then at the Markman hearing, while Plaintiff’s counsel at times suggested that “it[ is] inherent that [the titlebar] does display buttons[,]” (Tr. at 70; see also id. at 69), at other points, Plaintiff’s counsel stated that its construction meant only that while the titlebar always must have the buttons at issue, such buttons may not always be displayed because they may be deactivated (and thus, they are only “capable of” being displayed), (id. at 38-44, 66, 70, 72). This latter suggested meaning was news to Defendant, and surely was not something that Plaintiff clearly communicated in its briefing. (Id. at 54, 57-58, 65-66, 69, 72; D.I. 96 at 10-11, 13-14) Regardless, the Court concludes that Defendant’s position (i.e., that such buttons are neither required to be present in a titlebar, nor required to be displayed) is correct, for the following reasons: (a) The parties again heavily rely on extrinsic dictionary definitions here. And while some do indicate that a titlebar “has buttons” or “contain[s]” such buttons, (D.I. 123 , exs. G, Q), others note that a titlebar only “typically” does so or that “[m]ost” titlebars do (which means that some titlebars may not have such buttons), (id., ex. F; id., ex. O at ex. A at 522; Tr. at 59-61). Again, the fact that relevant definitions of the term are not uniform—and sometimes seem to align with Defendant’s broader understanding of claim scope—helps Defendant here.; and (b) Plaintiff pointed in support to Figure 3D of the 135 patent; that figure depicts titlebar 312, which in turn displays buttons for minimizing and maximizing the window. (D.I. 96 at 11, 14 (citing 135 patent at FIG. 3D)) But as Defendant points out, (id. at 12-13, 16), the specification explicitly notes that this embodiment is “merely illustrative” and that the “exact information in a titlebar, taskbar, or other display area is implementation specific[,]”(135 patent, col. 6:4-6). That type of phraseology supports Defendant’s position (i.e., that such buttons are not always required to be in a titlebar, let alone always required to be displayed), not Plaintiff’s. (D.I. 96 at 12-13, 15-16); see also GE Lighting Sols., LLC v. AgiLight, Inc., 750 F.3d 1304, 1309 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (noting that it is improper to read limitations from an embodiment into the claims, even if it is the only embodiment, absent a clear indication in the record that the patentee intended the claims to be so limited); and (3) Therefore, for the reasons set out above, the Court construes “titlebar” (largely in line with the wording of Defendant’s proposal) to mean: “bar at the top of a window that contains the name of the window.” Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 03/03/2025. (sam) (Entered: 03/03/2025) (0) |
| Mar 3, 2025 | 230 | ORAL ORDER: With regard to the parties’ pending renewed motions for claim construction, (D.I. 162 ; D.I. 163 ), the Court now addresses the construction of term 3: “taskbar.” The parties are basically in agreement that a “taskbar” has an ordinary meaning in the art “that at least includes the ability to select one of a number of active applications / running programs.” (D.I. 96 at 16-17; see also Tr. at 78-79) The key dispute is over whether a taskbar must always also serve as a “holder for icons in indicating running programs” as Plaintiff’s narrower proposal requires, or whether a taskbar could at times not include any icons (and instead, for example, simply include text), as Defendant’s proposal would allow. (D.I. 96 at 16-17 (emphasis added); see also Tr. at 78-79, 84, 86-88) The Court agrees with Defendant that including this disputed limitation in the construction is not appropriate; it will therefore construe the term in line with Defendant’s proposal to mean “a graphic toolbar used to select one of a number of active applications.” (D.I. 96 at 16) It does so for the following reasons: (1) The only intrinsic evidence Plaintiff cites in support is Figure 3D of the 135 patent, which depicts an embodiment containing a taskbar with icons. (135 patent, FIG. 3D (cited in D.I. 96 at 16)) But as the Court has previously explained, (D.I. 229 ), after noting this embodiment (i.e., the one that includes the “taskbar item 310”) the patent tells us that the “exact information in a... taskbar... is implementation specific[,]”(135 patent, col. 6:4-5). This guidance suggests that despite what item 310 depicts, it may not be appropriate to read an icon-related limitation into the definition of “taskbar.” See GE Lighting Sols., LLC v. AgiLight, Inc., 750 F.3d 1304, 1309 (Fed. Cir. 2014); see also (Tr. at 84).; and (2) Otherwise, in its opening brief, Plaintiff points in support to extrinsic dictionaries or websites (some of them non-technical, and some dated from well beyond the relevant time period); a few of these define “taskbar” to include icons, or suggest that a “taskbar” does so. (D.I. 123 , exs. J, R, S, T) That said, Defendant also provided a definition of “taskbar” from Microsoft (the maker of the operating system depicted in the 135 patent’s embodiments) from the relevant time period that does not mention use of icons—and that otherwise tracks Defendant’s proposal. (Id., ex. O at ex. A at 512; see also D.I. 96 at 17; Tr. at 85-86) The lesson gleaned from the sum total of these extrinsic definition-related exhibits is that at the relevant time, there was not necessarily a consensus that a taskbar like the one at issue here must always contain icons. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 03/03/2025. (sam) (Entered: 03/03/2025) (0) |
| Feb 24, 2025 | 226 | ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed Plaintiff’s discovery dispute motion (“Motion”), (D.I. 204 ), and the briefing related thereto, (D.I. 194 ; D.I. 197 ; D.I. 203 ), hereby addresses the portion of the Motion relating to revenue-related documents and information, (D.I. 194 at 1-2). As an initial matter, the Court rejects Defendant’s argument that because this Motion was filed after the Scheduling Order deadline for fact discovery closed, Plaintiff must demonstrate good cause in order to see its Motion granted. (D.I. 197 at 1 (citing Hardwick v. Connections Cmty. Support Programs, Inc., Civil Action No. 17-668-RGA, 2020 WL 584046, at *3 (D. Del. Feb. 6, 2020)) The Court sees that some other judges have held as much, (id.), but it disagrees. If the Scheduling Order had a deadline in it that said “All motions to compel discovery must be filed by X date,” then the Court would agree that a party filing such a motion after the date in question would need to show good cause for its filing. But the Court has always considered the standard deadline for fact discovery in a standard Scheduling Order to be the deadline for a party to seek fact discovery from its opponent—sometimes, as here, augmented by a requirement that the requesting party do so early enough that the discovery will “be completed” (or provided to it) by the relevant deadline. (D.I. 20 at 4) The Court has not necessarily viewed such a fact discovery deadline as the deadline for a party to file a motion with the Court seeking to compel production of discovery. There are just too many instances where discovery disputes do not fully mature or become clearly ripe until near or after the fact discovery deadline hits. Now, all that said, even if the good cause standard is not implicated, there could still be circumstances where Plaintiff nevertheless sat on its hands too long, and filed this motion to compel in an untimely fashion. But to the extent Defendant suggests that’s what happened here (and that Plaintiff therefore waived its ability to move to compel), (D.I. 197 at 1-2), there is just not enough information of record for the Court to make the call (over Plaintiff’s arguments to the contrary) that this is so, (D.I. 203 at 1). So, on to the merits. In that regard, the Court ORDERS as follows: (1) With regard to Plaintiff’s request for “Sponsored Updates revenue through at least Q3 2024[,]” (D.I. 194 at 1), the dispute here appears to be over relevance, (id.; D.I. 197 at 1), and the request is GRANTED. Although Defendant claims that this revenue is not relevant to damages because the accused flashing title bar functionality is displayed on a different portion of Defendant’s website from where the Sponsored Updates ads are shown, (D.I. 197 at 1), Plaintiff sufficiently explained its theory as to why there is nevertheless a tie between the accused functionality and the ads in question (i.e., that the functionality directs users to go to a portion of the site where the ads are located), (D.I. 194 at 1). And Defendant really didn’t address that argument in its briefing. (D.I. 197 at 1).; (2) With regard to Plaintiff’s request for documents that show estimates of converting Sessions and WAU to dollar amounts, (D.I. 194 at 1), it is DENIED as MOOT, in light of Defendant’s counsel’s assertion (which the Court has no reason not to credit at this time) that it has been unable to locate such documents after a good faith search, (D.I. 197 at 2).; (3) With regard to Plaintiff’s request for information related to Defendant’s average revenue per user/premium user, (D.I. 194 at 2), it is GRANTED, as Plaintiff provided an explanation as to relevance, (id.), and Defendant’s objections (lack of relevance, not proportional, unduly burdensome), were stated in a conclusory fashion, (D.I. 197 at 2).; (4) With regard to Plaintiff’s request for revenues associated with Feed Updates, (D.I. 194 at 1), it is GRANTED. Again here, the dispute is at least in part over relevance, and just as with the first disputed category of documents, Plaintiff has sufficiently and persuasively explained its relevance argument. (D.I. 203 at 1 (noting that Defendant’s “users are shown ads... [such as] Feed Updates[] when they return to the LinkedIn website, including in response to the titlebar notifications at issue in this case”)) To the extent Defendant also called the request “overly broad[,]” (D.I. 197 at 2), it provided no supporting information needed to flesh out that claim.; (5) With regard to Plaintiff’s request for production of revenues related to Premium subscriptions, (D.I. 194 at 2), it is GRANTED, as Plaintiff has identified a sufficient connection between the accused functionality (relating to the use of messaging capabilities on Defendant’s website) and the revenue category (paid by customers who utilized certain “Premium” messaging capabilities) for now.; and (6) Defendant shall timely provide the discovery ordered herein. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 02/24/2025. (sam) (Entered: 02/24/2025) (0) |
| Feb 24, 2025 | 227 | ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed Plaintiff’s discovery dispute motion (“Motion”), (D.I. 204 ), and the briefing related thereto, (D.I. 194 ; D.I. 197 ; D.I. 203 ), hereby addresses the portion of the Motion relating to metrics-related documents and information, (D.I. 194 at 2). Plaintiff here requests discovery regarding “Executive Level” Periodic Reports, “Messaging Weekly Emails” and “Product Foundation Dashboard Reports.” (Id.) The request is DENIED. Setting aside Defendant’s assertion of waiver, (D.I. 197 at 2, D.I. 226 ), from the briefing, it appears there are disputes here about whether these metrics: (a) exist and (b) are relevant, (D.I. 194 at 2; D.I. 197 at 2; D.I. 203 at 1). However, Plaintiff, who has the burden to demonstrate that relevant documents exist and have not been produced, see Cash Today of Tex., Inc. v. Greenberg, No. Civ.A. 02-MC-77-GMS, 2002 WL 31414138, at *1 (D. Del. Oct. 23, 2002), provided only limited information in an attempt to make that showing. Plaintiff’s efforts did not shed enough light on the subject for the Court to fully understand its relevance arguments (this was particularly notable in Plaintiff’s reply brief, where it had the chance to better explain how the metrics at issue relate to the accused functionality—and to answer Defendant’s arguments about lack of relevance—but did not do so). (D.I. 203 at 1) Moreover, in supporting these requests, Plaintiff repeatedly made assertions about what certain discovery in this case has shown, without attaching any relevant discovery documents (e.g., deposition transcripts) to its briefing. (D.I. 194 at 2; D.I. 203 at 1) This contravenes the guidance provided in paragraph 7 of the Court’s "Guidelines for Discovery Disputes" (found in the "Guidelines" tab on Judge Burke's portion of the District Court's website, and cited in the Court’s October 10, 2024 Oral Order). And it amounts simply to attorney argument, which cannot win the day as to a contested issue like this one. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 02/24/2025. (sam) (Entered: 02/24/2025) (0) |
| Feb 13, 2025 | 225 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Supplemental Disclosure Pursuant to Paragraph 7.e of the Court's Scheduling Order filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 02/13/2025) (2) |
| Feb 5, 2025 | 224 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Objections and Responses to Plaintiff's Amended Second Notice of Deposition of Corporate Representative of LinkedIn Corporation - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 02/05/2025) (3) |
| Feb 3, 2025 | 223 | STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to EXTEND the deadlines for: (i) for LinkedIn to make a corporate representative available for deposition pursuant to Plaintiff's Second Amended Rule 30(b)(6) Notice and (ii) for eBuddy to serve its supplemental infringement contentions to (i) 2/5/2025 and (ii) 2/12/2025 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 02/03/2025) (2) |
| Jan 13, 2025 | 222 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Objections and Responses to Plaintiff eBuddy's Ninth Requests for Production (Nos. 99-100) - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 01/13/2025) (3) |
| Dec 31, 2024 | 221 | SO ORDERED, D.I. 220 Stipulation Amending Scheduling Order filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. (Reply Expert Reports due by 5/21/2025, Expert Discovery due by 6/25/2025, Dispositive Motions due by 7/25/2025, A Pretrial Conference is set for 3/13/2026 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 2A before Judge Christopher J. Burke, A 5-day Jury Trial is set for 3/23/2026 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 2A before Judge Christopher J. Burke. See Order for further deadlines.) Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 12/31/2024. (smg) (Entered: 12/31/2024) (3) |
| Dec 27, 2024 | 220 | STIPULATION Amending Scheduling Order re 219 Oral Order by eBuddy Technologies B.V. (Farnan, Brian) Modified on 12/31/2024 (smg). (Entered: 12/27/2024) (3) |
| Dec 20, 2024 | 219 | ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties' joint notice of availability for trial and motion to amend the scheduling order, (D.I. 218), hereby ORDERS as follows: (1) The pretrial conference will be held on March 13, 2026 at 11:00 a.m. Trial will begin on March 23, 2026.; (2) With respect to the parties' dispute regarding whether Plaintiff should be required to move for leave to amend or supplement its infringement contentions, the Court understands why supplemental infringement contentions regarding Defendant's redesigned system would be helpful prior to supplemental expert reports. However, for the reasons set out by Plaintiff, good cause exists for supplementation of its infringement contentions, and thus a motion for leave to file such contentions is not necessary. (D.I. 218 at 3) The Court therefore ADOPTS Defendant's proposed case schedule, with the modification that Plaintiff shall file its supplemental infringement contentions by January 31, 2025.; and (3) By December 27, 2024, the parties shall file a revised proposed scheduling order reflecting these rulings. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 12/20/2024. (mlc) (Entered: 12/20/2024) (0) |
| Dec 19, 2024 | 218 | NOTICE of the Parties' Availability for Trial and Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order by eBuddy Technologies B.V. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 12/19/2024) (0) |
| Dec 12, 2024 | 217 | STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the Parties to provide the Court with their availability for trial in this case and to submit a revised case schedule to 12/19/2024 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 12/12/2024) (1) |
| Nov 27, 2024 | 216 | ORAL ORDER: The Court hereby advises the parties that during the December 2, 2024 videoconference, (D.I. 214), the Court will also address with the parties the November 18, 2024 stipulation to extend certain deadlines, (D.I. 215 ), and related trial scheduling issues. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 11/27/2024. (smg) (Entered: 11/27/2024) (0) |
| Nov 18, 2024 | 215 | STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to EXTEND the deadlines for: (i) Reply expert reports from the party with the initial burden of proof; (ii) all expert discovery; and (iii) all case dispositive motions to (i) 12/20/2024; (ii) 1/24/2025; and (iii) 2/6/2025 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 11/18/2024) (2) |
| Nov 4, 2024 | 210 | REDACTED VERSION of 205 Letter, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit C)(Cucuzzella, Lucinda) (Entered: 11/04/2024) (0) |
| Nov 4, 2024 | 211 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Rebuttal Expert Report of Philip Greenspun, Ph.D., Regarding Alleged Infringement of the Asserted Patents; and (2) Expert Report of Shelly D. Irvine - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 11/04/2024) (3) |
| Nov 4, 2024 | 212 | Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Hearing Date Conflicts. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 11/04/2024) (1) |
| Nov 4, 2024 | 213 | REDACTED VERSION of 203 Letter by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 11/04/2024) (3) |
| Nov 4, 2024 | 214 | ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties' November 4, 2024 letter, (D.I. 212 ), hereby ORDERS that the November 19, 2024 videoconference is rescheduled to December 2, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 11/4/2024. (smg) (Entered: 11/04/2024) (0) |
| Oct 31, 2024 | 209 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of Expert Rebuttal Report of Dr. Rajeev Surati Regarding the Expert Report of Dr. Philip Greenspun filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 10/31/2024) (2) |
| Oct 29, 2024 | 208 | ORAL ORDER: The Court, having considered Defendant’s notice indicating that a newer attorney would argue its pending Motion to Resolve Discovery Dispute (“Motion”), (D.I. 207 ), and pursuant to the Court's Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities forNewerAttorneys, hereby ORDERS as follows: (1) A videoconference to hear argument on Defendant’s Motion, (D.I. 206 ), is set for November 19, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. before Judge Christopher J. Burke via the Microsoft Teams platform. By no later than November 8, 2024, the parties shall send an e-mail to the Court's Courtroom Deputy, Ms. Grimes, indicating the names and e-mail addresses of all individuals who will participate in the hearing.; and (2) The Court will ensure that sufficient time is permitted for argument, and will permit experienced counsel to provide assistance when appropriate. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/29/2024. (smg) (Entered: 10/29/2024) (0) |
| Oct 28, 2024 | 200 | MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Surui Qu - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Cucuzzella, Lucinda) (Entered: 10/28/2024) (4) |
| Oct 28, 2024 | 201 | Pro Hac Vice Fee - Credit Card Payment received for Surui Qu. ( re 200 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Surui Qu )( Payment of $ 50, receipt number ADEDC-4533676).(Cucuzzella, Lucinda) (Entered: 10/28/2024) (0) |
| Oct 28, 2024 | 202 | REDACTED VERSION of 196 Letter, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-E)(Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 10/28/2024) (0) |
| Oct 28, 2024 | 203 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Reply Letter Brief. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 10/28/2024) (0) |
| Oct 28, 2024 | 204 | MOTION to Resolve Discovery Dispute - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 10/28/2024) (1) |
| Oct 28, 2024 | 205 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Lucinda C. Cucuzzella regarding Reply in Support of Request to Compel the Production of Certain Documents and Communications that Plaintiff has Withheld on Privilege Grounds. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit C)(Cucuzzella, Lucinda) (Entered: 10/28/2024) (0) |
| Oct 28, 2024 | 206 | MOTION to Resolve Discovery Dispute re 195 Letter, Oral Order,,,,,,, - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Cucuzzella, Lucinda) (Entered: 10/28/2024) (3) |
| Oct 28, 2024 | 207 | NOTICE of Intent for Newer Attorney to Argue Motion by LinkedIn Corporation re 206 MOTION to Resolve Discovery Dispute re 195 Letter, Oral Order (Cucuzzella, Lucinda) Modified on 10/29/2024 (smg). (Entered: 10/28/2024) (3) |
| Oct 24, 2024 | 199 | REDACTED VERSION of 195 Letter, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-B)(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/24/2024) (0) |
| Oct 23, 2024 | 198 | REDACTED VERSION of 194 Letter, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-D)(Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 10/23/2024) (0) |
| Oct 22, 2024 | 196 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Response to Defendant's October 16, 2024 Letter - re 195 Letter,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 10/22/2024) (0) |
| Oct 22, 2024 | 197 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding Response to eBuddy's October 16, 2024 Discovery Dispute Letter - re 194 Letter,. (Attachments: # 1 Ex. A, # 2 Ex. B, # 3 Ex. C, # 4 Ex. D, # 5 Ex. E)(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/22/2024) (0) |
| Oct 16, 2024 | 194 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding LinkedIn's Failure to Produce Relevant, Responsive Documents. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 10/16/2024) (0) |
| Oct 16, 2024 | 195 | [SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding Request to Compel the Production of Certain Documents and Communications that Plaintiff has Withheld on Privilege Grounds. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 10/16/2024) (0) |
| Oct 10, 2024 | 193 | Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Request for Discovery Teleconference. (Farnan, Michael) (Entered: 10/10/2024) (1) |
| Sep 23, 2024 | 191 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of (i) Expert Report of Dr. Rajeev Surati Regarding LinkedIn's Infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,230,135 and 8,402,179; (ii) Expert Report of Walter Bratic and Phillip Brida; and (iii) Expert Report of Dr. Larry Chiagouris filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 09/23/2024) (2) |
| Sep 23, 2024 | 192 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of Opening Expert Report of Philip Greenspun, Ph.D., Regarding Invalidity of the Asserted Patents filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 09/23/2024) (3) |
| Aug 22, 2024 | 190 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Objections and Responses to Plaintiff eBuddy's Fifth Interrogatories and Eighth Requests for Production; (2) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Supplemental Objections and Responses to Plaintiff eBuddy's Second Interrogatories (Nos. 9-10) and Third Requests for Production (No. 52); (3) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Supplemental Objections and Responses to Plaintiff eBuddy's Fourth Interrogatories and Seventh Requests for Production; and (4) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Supplemental Objections and Responses to Plaintiff eBuddy's First Interrogatories and Requests for Production - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 08/22/2024) (3) |
| Aug 19, 2024 | 189 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Diego Jiminez on 8/30/2024 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 08/19/2024) (2) |
| Jul 31, 2024 | 188 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Laura Teclemariam on 8/9/2024 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 07/31/2024) (2) |
| Jul 23, 2024 | 187 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Fifth Interrogatories and Eighth Requests for Production to LinkedIn filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 07/23/2024) (2) |
| Jul 18, 2024 | 186 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Second Amended Objections and Responses to LinkedIn's Rule 30(b)(6) Topics filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 07/18/2024) (2) |
| Jul 16, 2024 | 185 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Amended Objections and Responses to LinkedIn's Rule 30(b)(6) Topics filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 07/16/2024) (2) |
| Jul 15, 2024 | 184 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Objections and Responses to LinkedIn's Rule 30(b)(6) Topics filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 07/15/2024) (2) |
| Jun 25, 2024 | 183 | ORAL ORDER: The Court has kept the parties' reference to a 7-day trial in the stipulation to amend the Scheduling Order, (D.I. 176 ), but the parties should be aware that as the case proceeds closer to trial, the Court will allocate a certain amount of hours for the parties' trial presentations (and 7-day trials of any type, even in complex cases, are very rare in this District). Additionally, the pre-trial conference will begin at 2:00 p.m. on May 9, 2025 in Courtroom 2A. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 06/25/2024. (smg) (Entered: 06/25/2024) (0) |
| Jun 24, 2024 | 181 | Letter to The Honorable Richard G. Andrews, from Brian E. Farnan, regarding Magistrate Judge Consent. (Farnan, Brian) Modified on 6/24/2024 (nms). (Entered: 06/24/2024) (1) |
| Jun 24, 2024 | 182 | CONSENT to Jurisdiction by U.S. Magistrate Judge. Case reassigned to Magistrate Judge Christopher J. Burke. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 6/24/2024. (nms) (Entered: 06/24/2024) (1) |
| Jun 21, 2024 | 180 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Objections and Responses to Plaintiff's Second Amended Notice of Deposition of Corporate Representative of LinkedIn Corporation - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 06/21/2024) (3) |
| Jun 20, 2024 | 179 | ORAL ORDER: The stipulation to extend time (D.I. 176 ) is TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT. The Court will grant it if it the parties jointly consent to Magistrate Judge Burkes jurisdiction to conduct all further proceedings in the case, including the trial. Otherwise, the stipulation will be denied. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 6/20/2024. (nms) (Entered: 06/20/2024) (0) |
| Jun 18, 2024 | 177 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Jim Sorenson on June 26, 2024, filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Piergiovanni, Rosemary) Modified on 6/20/2024 (nms). (Entered: 06/18/2024) (2) |
| Jun 18, 2024 | 178 | NOTICE to Take Deposition of Nandeesh Channabasappa Rajashekar on June 24, 2024, filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Piergiovanni, Rosemary) Modified on 6/20/2024 (nms). (Entered: 06/18/2024) (2) |
| Jun 12, 2024 | 176 | STIPULATION and Proposed Order to Extend Time in the scheduling order, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Piergiovanni, Rosemary) Modified on 6/12/2024 (nms). (Entered: 06/12/2024) (2) |
| Jun 3, 2024 | 175 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Objections and Responses to Plaintiff eBuddy's Fourth Interrogatories and Seventh Requests for Production - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 06/03/2024) (3) |
| May 2, 2024 | 172 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Fourth Interrogatories and Seventh Requests for Production to LinkedIn filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 05/02/2024) (2) |
| May 2, 2024 | 173 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Notice of Deposition Pursuant to Rule 30(b)(1) to Jan-Joost Rueb; (2) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Notice of Deposition Pursuant to Rule 30(b)(1) to Paulo Taylor; (3) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Notice of Deposition Pursuant to Rule 30(b)(1) to Onno Bakker; and (4) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Notice of Deposition Pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) to Plaintiff eBuddy Technologies B.V. - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 05/02/2024) (3) |
| May 2, 2024 | 174 | STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Extend Time for Fact Discovery - by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 05/02/2024) (2) |
| Apr 15, 2024 | 171 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Final Invalidity Contentions; and (2) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Objections and Responses to Plaintiff eBuddy's Sixth Requests for Production - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 04/15/2024) (3) |
| Mar 15, 2024 | 170 | NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Objections and Responses to Plaintiff eBuddy's Third Interrogatories and Fifth Requests for Production filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 03/15/2024) (3) |
| Mar 14, 2024 | 169 | STIPULATION and Proposed Order to Extend Time to comply with § 2.2 of Court's ESI Order (D.I. 47) regarding privilege logs (D.I. 160 at 9) and to provide final invalidity contentions (D.I. 160 at 4) to March 29, 2024 and April 12, 2024, respectively - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) Modified on 3/14/2024 (nms). (Entered: 03/14/2024) (1) |
| Feb 15, 2024 | 168 | NOTICE of Subpoenas to Brent Simmons - by LinkedIn Corporation (Smith, Rodger) (Entered: 02/15/2024) (22) |
| Jan 26, 2024 | 167 | Letter to The Honorable Richard G. Andrews, from Michael J. Farnan, regarding IPR proceedings. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 1/26/2024 (nms). (Entered: 01/26/2024) (0) |
| Jan 9, 2024 | 166 | SUPPLEMENTAL Answering Claim Construction Brief, filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 1/9/2024 (nms). (Entered: 01/09/2024) (0) |
| Dec 19, 2023 | 165 | SUPPLEMENTAL Claim Construction Brief, filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-C)(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 12/19/2023 (nms). (Entered: 12/19/2023) (0) |
| Nov 29, 2023 | 164 | ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties' renewed motions for claim construction, (D.I. 162; D.I. 163), hereby ORDERS as follows: (1) By no later than December 19, 2023, each party may file a supplemental brief of no more than 5 double-spaced pages to address statements from the recently concluded inter partes review proceedings that might further inform the Courts claim constructions.; and (2) By no later than January 9, 2024, each party may file a responsive brief of no more than 5 double-spaced pages. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 11/29/2023. (dlb) (Entered: 11/29/2023) (0) |
| Nov 28, 2023 | 162 | RENEWED Motion for Claim Construction - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 11/28/2023 (nms). (Entered: 11/28/2023) (2) |
| Nov 28, 2023 | 163 | RENEWED Motion for Claim Construction - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 11/28/2023 (nms). (Entered: 11/28/2023) (4) |
| Nov 21, 2023 | 161 | ORAL ORDER: The Court hereby ORDERS that in light of the lifting of the stay of the case, the parties shall file renewed motions for claim construction by no later than November 28, 2023. (See D.I. 146). Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 11/21/2023. (dlb) (Entered: 11/21/2023) (0) |
| Nov 2, 2023 | 160 | SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery due by 5/31/2024. Opening Expert Reports due by 7/19/2024. Rebuttal Expert Reports due by 9/20/2024. Reply Expert Reports due by 10/11/2024. Expert Discovery due by 11/15/2024. Dispositive Motions due by 12/13/2024. A Pretrial Conference is set for 5/9/2025 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 6A before Judge Richard G. Andrews. A Jury Trial is set for 5/19/2025 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 6A before Judge Richard G. Andrews. Please see Order for further details and deadlines. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 11/2/2023. (dlb) (Entered: 11/02/2023) (16) |
| Nov 1, 2023 | 159 | PROPOSED Scheduling Order, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # 1 Letter)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 11/1/2023 (nms). (Entered: 11/01/2023) (0) |
| Oct 5, 2023 | 158 | ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties' joint status report, (D.I. 157), hereby ORDERS that by no later than November 1, 2023, the parties shall jointly submit a proposed Scheduling Order, which is consistent with Judge Burke's "Rule 16 Scheduling Order - Patent" up through and including paragraph 16 (i.e., regarding the portions of the case schedule leading up to but not including the case dispositive motion stage of the case) and that is consistent with paragraphs 10-17 of Judge Andrews' "Rule 16 Scheduling Order - Patent" (i.e., regarding the portions of the case schedule from the case dispositive motion stage through post-trial motions). To the extent there are any disputes in the proposed Scheduling Order, the parties may also submit a letter, not to exceed two pages, that sets out the parties' positions regarding any such disputes. Thereafter, the Court may schedule a Case Management Conference/Rule 16 Scheduling Conference to be held with Judge Burke. The Scheduling Orders can be found on Judge Burke's/Judge Andrews' portions of the District Court's website. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/5/2023. (mlc) (Entered: 10/05/2023) (0) |
| Oct 4, 2023 | 157 | Joint Status Report, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) Modified on 10/4/2023 (nms). (Entered: 10/04/2023) (1) |
| Sep 29, 2023 | 154 | SO ORDERED Granting 153 Stipulation of Dismissal of Plaintiff's Claims brought under U.S. Patent Nos. 8,510,395 and 9,584,453. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 9/29/2023. (lah) Modified on 10/2/2023 (nms). (Entered: 09/29/2023) (2) |
| Sep 29, 2023 | 155 | ORAL ORDER: Per the dismissal of the claims brought under U.S. Patent Nos. 8,510,395 and 9,584,453, the stay is lifted. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 9/29/2023. (lah) (Entered: 09/29/2023) (0) |
| Sep 29, 2023 | 156 | ORAL ORDER: The Court hereby ORDERS that in light of the lifting of the stay of the case, the parties shall meet and confer and submit a joint status report by no later than October 4, 2023 advising the Court what should happen next in the case. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 9/29/2023. (dlb) (Entered: 09/29/2023) (0) |
| Sep 28, 2023 | 153 | STIPULATION of Dismissal of Plaintiff's Claims Brought Under U.S. Patent Nos. 8,510,395 and 9,584,453, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) Modified on 10/2/2023 (nms). (Entered: 09/28/2023) (2) |
| Jul 31, 2023 | 152 | ORAL ORDER: The Court has read the joint status letter (D.I. 151 ). The Court is not going to turn one case into two cases. Nor is it going to go forward when two (the 395 and 453) of the four asserted patents are likely invalid. If Ebuddy chooses to drop the two likely invalid patents with prejudice, and is willing to proceed only on the two likely not proven invalid patents, then the Court will lift the stay and we can proceed on those two. Otherwise, the stay will remain in place. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 7/31/2023. (lah) (Entered: 07/31/2023) (0) |
| Jul 21, 2023 | 151 | Joint Notice Regarding Status of the Claims and the Parties' Proposal(s) for Going Forward, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) Modified on 7/21/2023 (nms). (Entered: 07/21/2023) (4) |
| Jul 10, 2023 | 150 | STIPULATION and Proposed Order to Extend Time to submit a joint status report to 7/24/2023 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) Modified on 7/10/2023 (nms). (Entered: 07/10/2023) (2) |
| Jan 20, 2023 | 149 | ORDER: The case is ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED. The parties shall promptly notify the Court when the "PTAB" action has been resolved so that this case may be reopened and other appropriate action may be taken. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 1/20/2023. (nms) (Entered: 01/20/2023) (1) |
| Nov 18, 2022 | 148 | ORAL ORDER: In light of D.I. 147 , the pretrial (6/2/2023) and trial dates (6/12/2023 - 6/20/2023) are vacated. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 11/18/2022. (nms) (Entered: 11/18/2022) (0) |
| Jul 25, 2022 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [147] Motion to Continue the Stay Pending Inter Partes Review filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 7/22/2022. (dlb) |
| Jul 20, 2022 | 147 | Motion to Stay (3) Docket Text: Motion to Continue the Stay Pending Inter Partes Review - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 7/21/2022 (nms). |
| Jun 2, 2022 | N/A | CORRECTING ENTRY: (0) Docket Text: CORRECTING ENTRY: The PDF at D.I. 145 has been corrected to reflect the "unchanged" Pretrial Conference date is June 2, 2023 (scheduled date) and not June 5, 2023 (typo) as was noted. (dlb) |
| May 27, 2022 | 145 | SO ORDERED (1) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [144] JOINT Motion to Stay Pending Receipt of Institution Decisions and to Amend the Scheduling Order in View of the Stay filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Jury Trial set to commence on June 12, 2023 will be a five (5) day trial (See attached). Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 5/27/2022. (dlb) (Main Document 145 replaced on 6/2/2022) (dlb). |
| May 27, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: In light of the stay in this matter, the MOTIONS for Claim Construction filed by LinkedIn Corporation and eBuddy Technologies B.V. (D.I. Nos. [102][99]) are denied without prejudice with leave to renew once the stay is lifted. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 5/27/2022. (dlb) |
| May 26, 2022 | 144 | Motion for Miscellaneous Relief (Main Document) (4) Docket Text: JOINT Motion to Stay Pending Receipt of Institution Decisions and to Amend the Scheduling Order in View of the Stay - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Proposed Order)Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 5/26/2022 (nms). |
| May 26, 2022 | 144 | Motion for Miscellaneous Relief (Exhibit A) (2) Docket Text: JOINT Motion to Stay Pending Receipt of Institution Decisions and to Amend the Scheduling Order in View of the Stay - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Proposed Order)Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 5/26/2022 (nms). |
| May 26, 2022 | 144 | Motion for Miscellaneous Relief (Text of Proposed Order) (2) Docket Text: JOINT Motion to Stay Pending Receipt of Institution Decisions and to Amend the Scheduling Order in View of the Stay - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Proposed Order)Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 5/26/2022 (nms). |
| May 25, 2022 | 143 | Notice of Service (2) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Third Interrogatories and Fifth Requests for Production to LinkedIn filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| May 20, 2022 | 142 | Notice to Take Deposition (11) Docket Text: NOTICE to Take Deposition of eBuddy Technologies B.V. on a date and time mutually agreeable to the parties filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| May 19, 2022 | 141 | Notice of Service (3) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's First Amended Disclosures Under the ESI Order; and (2) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's First Amended Initial Disclosures - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| May 18, 2022 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [140] STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the Parties to comply with § 2.2 of Court's ESI Order (D.I. 47) regarding privilege logs to 5/31/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 5/18/2022. (dlb) |
| May 17, 2022 | 140 | Stipulation to EXTEND Time (1) Docket Text: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the Parties to comply with § 2.2 of Court's ESI Order (D.I. 47) regarding privilege logs to 5/31/2022 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) |
| May 16, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The Court advises the parties that it will not meet its aspirational goal of issuing a claim construction order within 60 days of the Markman hearing. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 5/16/2022. (dlb) |
| May 10, 2022 | 138 | Notice of Service (2) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Disclosure Pursuant to Paragraph 7.e of the Court's Scheduling Order filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| May 2, 2022 | 137 | Notice (Other) (13) Docket Text: NOTICE of Amended Subpoena to Oracle Corporation by LinkedIn Corporation (Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 29, 2022 | 131 | Notice to Take Deposition (2) Docket Text: NOTICE to Take Deposition of Julia Cabral on 5/9/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Apr 29, 2022 | 132 | Notice to Take Deposition (2) Docket Text: NOTICE to Take Deposition of Mary Yang on 5/16/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Apr 29, 2022 | 133 | Notice to Take Deposition (2) Docket Text: NOTICE to Take Deposition of Stephanie Killian on 5/19/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Apr 29, 2022 | 134 | Notice to Take Deposition (2) Docket Text: NOTICE to Take Deposition of Albert Cui on 5/26/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Apr 29, 2022 | 135 | Notice of Service (2) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Fourth Requests for Production to LinkedIn filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Apr 29, 2022 | 136 | Notice (Other) (30) Docket Text: NOTICE of Subpoena to Apple Inc., Cerulean Studios, LLC and Oracle Corporation by LinkedIn Corporation (Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 28, 2022 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [128] MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Alyssa M. Caridis filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 4/28/2022. (dlb) |
| Apr 27, 2022 | 129 | Notice (Other) (30) Docket Text: NOTICE of Amended Subpoena to Apollo Global by LinkedIn Corporation (Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 27, 2022 | 130 | Notice (Other) (13) Docket Text: NOTICE of Subpoena to GOOGLE LLC by LinkedIn Corporation (Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 25, 2022 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED, re [126] MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Faye Paul Teller, filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 4/25/2022. (nms) |
| Apr 25, 2022 | 128 | Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice (3) Docket Text: MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Alyssa M. Caridis - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 22, 2022 | 126 | Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice (4) Docket Text: MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Faye Paul Teller - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 22, 2022 | 127 | Notice (Other) (30) Docket Text: NOTICE of Subpoena to Apollo Global and Cisco Systems by LinkedIn Corporation (Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 8, 2022 | 125 | Answer to Amended Complaint (30) Docket Text: ANSWER to [14] Amended Complaint, with Jury Demand, by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 4/8/2022 (nms). |
| Apr 6, 2022 | 124 | Notice of Service (3) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Objections and Responses to Plaintiff eBuddy's Second Interrogatories (Nos. 9-10) and Third Requests for Production (No. 52) - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 4, 2022 | N/A | Case No Longer Referred to Mediation (0) Docket Text: CASE NO LONGER REFERRED to Chief Magistrate Judge Thynge for the purpose of exploring ADR. Pursuant to the Court's Standing Order No. 2022-2, dated March 14, 2022, "[u]nless otherwise directed by the Court, Magistrate Judges will no longer engage in alternative dispute resolution of patent and securities cases." See also 28 U.S.C. § 652(b). (Taylor, Daniel) |
| Mar 28, 2022 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [121] STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for Defendant LinkedIn Corporation to file its Answer in response to the First Amended Complaint to April 8, 2022 filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/28/22. (mlc) |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 122 | Letter (2) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke, from Michael J. Farnan, regarding revised Joint Appendix of exhibits to Joint Claim Construction Brief. (Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Main Document) (3) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit A) (3) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit B) (17) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit C) (18) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit D) (21) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit E) (21) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit F) (5) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit G) (4) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit H) (18) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit I) (5) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit J) (5) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit K) (20) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit L) (6) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit M) (4) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit N) (3) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit O) (8) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit P) (3) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit Q) (5) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit R) (10) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit S) (12) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit T) (3) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 28, 2022 | 123 | Appendix (Exhibit U) (5) Docket Text: REVISED Joint Appendix re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/29/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 25, 2022 | 121 | Stipulation to EXTEND Time (1) Docket Text: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for Defendant LinkedIn Corporation to file its Answer in response to the First Amended Complaint to April 8, 2022 - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) |
| Mar 17, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The Court, as discussed with the parties yesterday, hereby ORDERS that the discovery dispute teleconference previously set for March 21, 2022 is CANCELLED, as the parties have notified the Court that the dispute has been resolved. (D.I. 107). Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/17/2022. (dlb) |
| Mar 16, 2022 | N/A | Markman Hearing (0) Docket Text: Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Christopher J. Burke - Markman Hearing held on 3/16/2022 via videoconference. The Court heard argument from the parties regarding claim construction. (D.I. 99; D.I. 102) The Court took the matter under advisement and will issue an opinion. (Clerk, E. Bryant-Alvarez) APPEARANCES: R. Piergiovanni, S. Schlather, and J. Edmonds for Plaintiff; R. Smith, II, C. Kao and B. Weber for Defendant. (Court Reporter Michele Wolfe) (dlb) |
| Mar 15, 2022 | 119 | Letter (1) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding courtesy copies of Defendant's Claim Construction Presentation pursuant to the Court's February 24, 2022 Oral Order. (Smith, Rodger) |
| Mar 11, 2022 | 117 | Notice to Take Deposition (2) Docket Text: NOTICE to Take Deposition of Jessica Carlson on 3/30/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Mar 11, 2022 | 118 | Memorandum and Order (4) Docket Text: MEMORANDUM ORDER: The Report and Recommendation (D.I. [69]) is ADOPTED. Defendant's objections (D.I. [74]) are OVERRULED and Defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim (D.I. [17]) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 3/11/2022. (nms) |
| Mar 8, 2022 | N/A | Remark (0) Docket Text: Remark: The pdfs for the exhibits found at D.I. [90] and D.I. [111] have been replaced with updated versions per the directive at D.I. [116]. (nms) |
| Mar 8, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows regarding the March 16, 2022 Markman hearing: (1) Having reviewed the parties' March 4, 2022 letter, (D.I. 94), in which the parties indicated that they would prefer to hold the hearing virtually, the March 16, 2022 Markman hearing will be held virtually over videoconference using the Microsoft Teams platform.; and (2) By no later than Friday March 11, 2022, the parties shall send an e-mail to the Court's Courtroom Deputy, Ms. Benyo, indicating the names and e-mail addresses of all individuals who will participate in the hearing. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/8/2022. (dlb) |
| Mar 8, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The sealed Exhibit D at D.I. [90]-1 is STRUCK in its entirety (that is, from 20 of 55 to 49 of 55) except for ANNEX 3 (that is, 42 of 55), which is not struck and which is UNSEALED. It is the only page of exhibit D that is cited in D.I. 90 (at 5 of 6). Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 3/8/2022. (nms) |
| Mar 7, 2022 | 110 | Notice of Service (2) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Second Interrogatories and Third Requests for Production to LinkedIn filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Mar 7, 2022 | 111 | Redacted Document (Main Document) (6) Docket Text: REDACTED VERSION of [90] Letter, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibits A-F)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/8/2022 (nms). (Attachment 1 replaced on 3/8/2022) (nms). |
| Mar 7, 2022 | 111 | Redacted Document (Exhibits A-F) (26) Docket Text: REDACTED VERSION of [90] Letter, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibits A-F)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 3/8/2022 (nms). (Attachment 1 replaced on 3/8/2022) (nms). |
| Mar 7, 2022 | 113 | Redacted Document (Main Document) (1) Docket Text: REDACTED VERSION of [112] Letter by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Mar 7, 2022 | 113 | Redacted Document (Exhibit A) (4) Docket Text: REDACTED VERSION of [112] Letter by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Mar 7, 2022 | 114 | Letter (1) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Markman Hearing Meet and Confer. (Farnan, Michael) |
| Mar 4, 2022 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [109] STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the Parties to comply with § 2.2 of Court's ESI Order (D.I. 47) regarding privilege logs to 5/17/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/4/2022. (dlb) |
| Mar 4, 2022 | 105 | Letter (1) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Claim Construction Hearing. (Farnan, Michael) |
| Mar 4, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties' March 4, 2022 letter, (D.I. 105), hereby ADOPTS the parties' proposal regarding holding the Markman hearing virtually. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/4/2021. (dlb) |
| Mar 4, 2022 | 107 | Letter (1) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke, from Rodger D. Smith II, regarding the parties request to cancel the discovery teleconference set for March 21, 2022. (Smith, Rodger) Modified on 3/4/2022 (nms). |
| Mar 4, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed Defendant's motion to stay the case pending resolution of inter partes review ("IPR") proceedings that are being sought as to each of the four patents-in-suit ("Motion"), (D.I. 80), and the briefing related thereto, (D.I. 81; D.I. 89; D.I. 90), and having considered the three stay-related factors, hereby ORDERS that the Motion is DENIED without prejudice to renew in light of the following: (1) For reasons it has previously expressed, the Court is not typically inclined to grant a stay in favor of IPR proceedings when a case has been moving forward for a while and when the PTAB has not yet determined whether to initiate review of any of the patents-in-suit. See Advanced Microscopy Inc. v. Carl Zeiss Microscopy, LLC, Civil Action No. 15-516-LPS-CJB, 2016 WL 558615, at *2 (D. Del. Feb. 11, 2016) (noting that denial of a motion to stay pending the PTAB's decision on whether IPR will be instituted "will allow for a better, more fully developed record as to the 'simplification of issues' factor" and will assist the court in "efficiently managing its docket[,]" since taking that path avoids the prospect of "stop[ping] a district court proceeding after it has startedonly to perhaps be required to start it up again later if the PTAB issues an unfavorable decision to the petitioner" and it allows the court to make "one good decision at one point [as to a stay] when the key data is at hand").; (2) That outcome seems particularly appropriate here, as while the case is surely not in its later stages, nevertheless: (a) the parties and the Court have already engaged in a fair amount of work on it (including due to the time-intensive Section 101 motion-to-dismiss process); (b) the parties and the Court are in the midst of preparing for a Markman hearing; and (c) the parties are in the later stages of the discovery period, and have already gone back and forth quite a bit regarding disputes over deposition scheduling or e-discovery production. (D.I. 89 at 5; D.I. 90 at 2-3); (3) With regard to Defendant's argument that "[i]f this Court defers ruling on the stay until May or July, the parties and the Court will have to proceed through several labor-intensive stages of litigation" (i.e. the Markman hearing and certain depositions), (D.I. 90 at 2), the fact that this Motion is being decided at this particular stage of the case is not Plaintiff's fault or the Court's fault; it is a function of when Defendant chose to file its IPR petitions (and its subsequent Motion). So the Court does not see how this reality should be held against Plaintiff or militate in favor of a stay now.; (4) As for Defendant's argument that "if the Court does not stay this case, the PTAB may deny institution of" Defendant's four IPR petitions (in light of the Fintiv factors), (D.I. 81 at 15), the Court holds no brief for Defendant, and so it has no view as to whether the PTAB should or should not deny institution of the IPRs. That said, to the extent it is helpful for the PTAB's institution analysis, the Court can say that: (a) if all four petitions are instituted, Defendant will have a good chance of then obtaining a stay of the case (though the Court would still give Plaintiff an opportunity to argue why a stay is not warranted); (b) if all four petitions are denied, obviously no stay will be sought or granted; and (c) if some petitions are granted and some are denied, it is difficult to predict what will happen in terms of a subsequent stay request.; (5) Therefore, no later than five business days after the PTAB rules on whether it will institute IPR as to the last of the petitions at issue, the parties shall provide the Court with a status report of no more than two single-spaced pages, indicating the outcome of the petitions and whether Defendant wishes to renew its Motion. If Defendant does wish to renew the Motion then, the Court will set a further (truncated) briefing schedule. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/4/2022. (dlb) |
| Mar 4, 2022 | 109 | Stipulation to EXTEND Time (1) Docket Text: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the Parties to comply with § 2.2 of Court's ESI Order (D.I. 47) regarding privilege logs to 5/17/2022 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) |
| Mar 3, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows regarding the March 16, 2022 Markman hearing: (1) The hearing will now begin at 11:30 a.m.; (2) Having reviewed the parties' Joint Claim Construction Brief ("JCCB"), (D.I. 96), the Court notes that it will hear argument on terms A-G during the hearing (i.e., every term in the JCCB up to and including "low level network"), in order to make oral argument more efficient and less unwieldy. The Court will take terms H-N on the papers.; and (3) The Court's current plan is to try to address the pending motion to stay, (D.I. 80), before the claim construction hearing occurs. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/3/2022. (dlb) |
| Mar 1, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER Setting Teleconference: The Court has reviewed the parties' February 28, 2022 letter requesting a discovery teleconference. (D.I. 100) The Court hereby ORDERS that the procedures for resolving a discovery dispute set out in the Scheduling Order will be modified as follows with regard to the dispute: (1) A Discovery Conference is set for 3/21/2022 at 11:00 AM before Judge Christopher J. Burke.; (2) By no later than March 8, 2022, the party seeking relief shall file with the Court an opening letter brief, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining the issue it is raising and its position on that issue.; (3) By no later than March 15, 2022, the responding party may file an answering letter brief, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining its reasons for its opposition to the opening letter brief.; (4) The parties shall jointly file a Motion For Teleconference To Resolve Discovery Dispute.; (5) By no later than March 18, 2022, the parties shall jointly provide the Court's Courtroom Deputy, Ms. Benyo, with a dial-in number via e-mail to use for the call.; (6) The parties should also consult and follow Judge Burke's "Guidelines for Discovery Disputes," which is found in the "Guidelines" tab on Judge Burke's portion of the District Court's website.; and (7) It is possible that the Court may choose to resolve the disputes prior to the telephone conference. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/1/2022. (mlc) |
| Mar 1, 2022 | 102 | Motion for Miscellaneous Relief (2) Docket Text: MOTION for Claim Construction - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Mar 1, 2022 | 103 | Motion for Hearing (2) Docket Text: Joint Motion for Teleconference to Resolve Discovery Disputes - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 3/1/2022 (nms). |
| Feb 28, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The redacted filing (D.I. [95]) is REJECTED because parts of it are redacted in its entirety. Absent a compelling reason, supported by a statement under oath by a party, redactions in their entirety are impermissible; redactions must be done so as to redact the least possible amount of the materials submitted. Failure to make a good faith attempt at such redactions may result in sanctions, the most common of which would be simply unsealing the entire filing. Redacting in its entirety a document that contains publicly available materials is prima facie evidence of bad faith. A revised redacted filing is DUE within five business days. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 2/28/2022. (nms) |
| Feb 28, 2022 | 99 | Motion for Miscellaneous Relief (1) Docket Text: MOTION for Claim Construction - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Farnan, Brian) |
| Feb 28, 2022 | 100 | Letter (2) Docket Text: Joint Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding request for a discovery teleconference. (Smith, Rodger) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 95 | Redacted Document (Main Document) (6) Docket Text: REDACTED VERSION of [90] Letter, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibits A-F)(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 2/25/2022 (nms). |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 95 | Redacted Document (Exs. A-F) (26) Docket Text: REDACTED VERSION of [90] Letter, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibits A-F)(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 2/25/2022 (nms). |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 96 | Joint Claim Construction Brief (30) Docket Text: JOINT Claim Construction Brief, filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) Modified on 2/28/2022 (nms). |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Main Document) (3) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit A) (3) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit B) (17) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit C) (18) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit D) (21) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit E) (21) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit F) (5) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit G) (4) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit H) (18) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit I) (5) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit J) (5) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit K) (20) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit L) (6) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit M) (4) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit N) (3) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit O) (9) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit P) (3) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit Q) (5) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit R) (10) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit S) (12) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit T) (3) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 97 | Appendix (Exhibit U) (5) Docket Text: APPENDIX re [96] Joint Claim Construction Brief by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D, # (5) Exhibit E, # (6) Exhibit F, # (7) Exhibit G, # (8) Exhibit H, # (9) Exhibit I, # (10) Exhibit J, # (11) Exhibit K, # (12) Exhibit L, # (13) Exhibit M, # (14) Exhibit N, # (15) Exhibit O, # (16) Exhibit P, # (17) Exhibit Q, # (18) Exhibit R, # (19) Exhibit S, # (20) Exhibit T, # (21) Exhibit U)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 24, 2022 | 93 | Notice of Service (3) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Sur-Reply Claim Construction Brief - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Feb 24, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows regarding the March 16, 2022 Markman hearing: (1) Having reviewed the parties' February 23, 2022 letter, (D.I. 92), the Court hereby ADOPTS the parties' proposal regarding time allocation for the Markman hearing, and it ADOPTS the parties' proposal regarding claim term order and order of argument for the hearing. Three hours will be allocated for argument, to be split equally between the parties.; (2) For administrative purposes, by no later than March 4, 2022, each party shall file a "Motion for Claim Construction" that requests the Court to adopt the claim construction position(s) of that party set forth in the Joint Claim Construction Chart and their briefing. The motion shall not contain any argument and shall simply state that the party "requests that the Court adopt the claim construction position[s] of [the party] set forth in the Joint Claim Construction Chart and its briefing."; (3) By no later than March 4, 2022, the parties shall submit a joint letter, of no more than two single-spaced pages, indicating whether each party would prefer to hold the hearing virtually or in-person. The Court is willing to have an in-person hearing. However, in light of the current state of affairs with the COVID-19 pandemic, the Court will hold the hearing by videoconference if either party indicates that it would prefer to not hold an in-person hearing due to COVID-related reasons.; (4) By no later than March 4, 2022, the parties shall also submit to the Court two hard copies of the claim construction briefing and any accompanying exhibits/declarations.; (5) The parties should be aware that the Court is not inclined to hear argument on 14 different terms or construe that many terms at this time. The Court will take a look at the Joint Claim Construction Brief when it comes in and, after doing so, if the Court decides that it will hear argument at the Markman hearing on less than all 14 terms referenced in the parties' letter, it will give the parties advance notice of that.; (6) On or before March 7, 2022, local and lead counsel for the parties shall meet and confer and file an amended joint claim construction chart that sets forth the terms/issues that remain in dispute. The meet and confer shall focus on an attempt to reach agreement on any remaining disputed terms/issues where possible and on an attempt to focus the dispute over the remaining terms/issues in light of the parties' claim construction briefing. Accompanying any amended joint claim construction chart, the parties shall file a joint letter with the Court, of no more than two single-spaced pages, which identifies by name each individual who participated in the meet and confer, and describes when and how that meet and confer occurred and how long it lasted. If no agreements on constructions have been reached or if no dispute has been narrowed in light of the meet and confer, the letter shall so state and the parties need not file an amended joint claim construction chart.; and (7) Twenty-four hours in advance of the hearing, each side shall: (a) submit two hard copies of its slide presentation to the Court; and (b) email its slide presentation to Ms. Benyo (copying the other side). Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 2/24/2021. (dlb) |
| Feb 23, 2022 | 92 | Letter (2) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Richard G. Andrews from Michael J. Farnan regarding March 16, 2022 Claim Construction Hearing. (Farnan, Michael) |
| Feb 22, 2022 | 91 | Status Report (3) Docket Text: JOINT Status Report, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) Modified on 2/23/2022 (nms). |
| Feb 11, 2022 | 89 | Letter (8) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke, from Michael J. Farnan, regarding response to Defendant's Motion to Stay (D.I. [80]).(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 2/14/2022 (nms). |
| Feb 4, 2022 | 85 | Notice to Take Deposition (2) Docket Text: NOTICE to Take Deposition of Albert Cui on 3/1/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Feb 4, 2022 | 86 | Notice to Take Deposition (2) Docket Text: NOTICE to Take Deposition of Brad Ciraulo on 3/2/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Feb 4, 2022 | 87 | Notice to Take Deposition (2) Docket Text: NOTICE to Take Deposition of Julia Cabral on 3/4/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Feb 4, 2022 | 88 | Notice to Take Deposition (2) Docket Text: NOTICE to Take Deposition of Mary Yang on 3/3/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Jan 31, 2022 | 83 | Notice of Service (3) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Answering Claim Construction Brief; and (2) Declaration of Christopher Kao in Support of LinkedIn Corporation's Answering Claim Construction Brief - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Jan 31, 2022 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The Court has reviewed Defendant's motion to stay pending Inter Partes Review ("Motion"). (D.I. 80) The Court hereby ORDERS: (1) Plaintiff's answering brief shall be no more than (8) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font.; (2) Defendant's reply brief shall be no more than four (4) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font.; and (3) the timing of the answering brief and reply brief shall be dictated by the Local Rules. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 1/31/2021. (dlb) |
| Jan 28, 2022 | 80 | Motion to Stay (Main Document) (3) Docket Text: MOTION to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # (1) Proposed Order)Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 1/31/2022 (nms). |
| Jan 28, 2022 | 80 | Motion to Stay (Proposed Order) (1) Docket Text: MOTION to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # (1) Proposed Order)Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 1/31/2022 (nms). |
| Jan 28, 2022 | 81 | Opening Brief in Support (22) Docket Text: OPENING BRIEF in Support re [80] MOTION to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review, filed by LinkedIn Corporation.Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 2/11/2022. (Smith, Rodger) Modified on 1/31/2022 (nms). |
| Jan 28, 2022 | 82 | Declaration (Main Document) (4) Docket Text: DECLARATION of Christopher Kao re [81] Opening Brief in Support, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibits A-N)(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 1/31/2022 (nms). |
| Jan 28, 2022 | 82 | Declaration (Exs. A-N) (30) Docket Text: DECLARATION of Christopher Kao re [81] Opening Brief in Support, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibits A-N)(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 1/31/2022 (nms). |
| Jan 19, 2022 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [73] MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney John J. Edmonds filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 1/19/2022. (dlb) |
| Jan 19, 2022 | N/A | Add Attorneys Pro Hac Vice (0) Docket Text: Pro Hac Vice Attorney John J. Edmonds for eBuddy Technologies B.V. added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. (srs) |
| Jan 14, 2022 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [79] STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the Parties to comply with § 2.2 of Court's ESI Order (D.I. 47) regarding privilege logs to 3/17/2022 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 1/14/2021. (dlb) |
| Jan 14, 2022 | 79 | Stipulation to EXTEND Time (1) Docket Text: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the Parties to comply with § 2.2 of Court's ESI Order (D.I. 47) regarding privilege logs to 3/17/2022 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) |
| Jan 13, 2022 | 78 | Response to Objections (14) Docket Text: RESPONSE to [74] Objections, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) Modified on 1/14/2022 (nms). |
| Jan 6, 2022 | 77 | Notice (Other) (1) Docket Text: NOTICE of Submission of Technology Tutorial by eBuddy Technologies B.V. (Farnan, Michael) |
| Dec 23, 2021 | 74 | Objections (16) Docket Text: OBJECTIONS to [69] Report and Recommendations, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) Modified on 12/27/2021 (nms). |
| Dec 23, 2021 | 75 | Declaration (Main Document) (2) Docket Text: DECLARATION of Christopher Kao re [74] Objections, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A)(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 12/27/2021 (nms). |
| Dec 23, 2021 | 75 | Declaration (Ex. A) (6) Docket Text: DECLARATION of Christopher Kao re [74] Objections, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A)(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 12/27/2021 (nms). |
| Dec 23, 2021 | 76 | Statement (2) Docket Text: CERTIFICATION re [74] Objections, by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) Modified on 12/27/2021 (nms). |
| Dec 20, 2021 | 72 | Notice of Service (3) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of Objections and Responses to Plaintiff eBuddy's Second Requests for Production (Nos. 21-51) filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Dec 20, 2021 | 73 | Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice (2) Docket Text: MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney John J. Edmonds - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Farnan, Brian) |
| Dec 8, 2021 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [71] Stipulation to Amend Scheduling Order filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Objections to Report and Recommendation of 11/29 (D.I. 69 due 12/23/2021; Response to Objections due 1/13, 2022; Claim Construction Opening Brief due by 1/6/2022; Claim Construction Answering Brief due by 1/28/2022 See Stipulation for further details and deadlines. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 12/8/2021. (dlb) |
| Dec 8, 2021 | 71 | Stipulation (2) Docket Text: STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Amend Scheduling Order - by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) |
| Nov 30, 2021 | 70 | Claim Construction Chart (10) Docket Text: Joint Claim Construction Chart, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) Modified on 12/1/2021 (nms). |
| Nov 29, 2021 | 69 | Report and Recommendations (23) Docket Text: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS regarding D.I. [17] MOTION to Dismiss filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Please note that when filing Objections pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2), briefing consists solely of the Objections (no longer than ten (10) pages) and the Response to the Objections (no longer than ten (10) pages). No further briefing shall be permitted with respect to objections without leave of the Court. Objections to R&R due by 12/13/2021. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 11/29/2021. (dlb) |
| Nov 18, 2021 | 68 | Notice of Service (2) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Second Requests for Production to LinkedIn filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Nov 16, 2021 | 67 | Notice of Service (3) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Disclosure of Claim Terms and Preliminary Claim Construction Positions - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Nov 1, 2021 | 66 | Notice of Service (3) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Preliminary Invalidity Contentions - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Oct 22, 2021 | 65 | Letter (1) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Claims at Issue. (Farnan, Michael) |
| Oct 15, 2021 | N/A | Motion Hearing (0) Docket Text: Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Christopher J. Burke - Motion Hearing held on 10/15/2021 regarding D.I. [17] MOTION to Dismiss filed by LinkedIn Corporation. The Court heard the parties' arguments regarding the Motion to Dismiss (the "Motion"), (D.I. 19). After hearing the parties regarding the dispute, the Court took the Motion under advisement. (Court Reporter Stacy Ingram (Hawkins). Clerk: Bryant-Alvarez) APPEARANCES: M. Farnan and S. Schlather for Plaintiff; R. Smith, II, C. Kao, and B. Weber for Defendant. (mlc) |
| Oct 14, 2021 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The Court hereby ORDERS that at tomorrow's oral argument, the parties will each have 45 minutes per side for their presentations. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/14/2021. (mlc) |
| Oct 8, 2021 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED, re [63] Stipulation to Amend Scheduling Order deadlines filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/7/2021. (dlb) |
| Oct 7, 2021 | 63 | Stipulation (2) Docket Text: STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Amend Scheduling Order - by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) |
| Sep 29, 2021 | N/A | Case Assigned/Reassigned (0) Docket Text: Case Reassigned to Judge Richard G. Andrews. Please include the initials of the Judge (RGA) after the case number on all documents filed. (rjb) |
| Sep 29, 2021 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: Due to a scheduling conflict the Pretrial Conference set for 6/5/2023, is CANCELED. The pretrial conference is rescheduled for 6/2/2023, at 9:00 am in Courtroom 6A before Judge Richard G. Andrews. The Jury Trial scheduled to start 6/12/2023, at 9:30 AM will now be held in Courtroom 6A before Judge Richard G. Andrews. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 9/29/2021. (nms) |
| Sep 22, 2021 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties' letters relating to Defendant's request to renew its motion to stay, (D.I. 56, 60), hereby ORDERS that the request is DENIED. To a great degree, the issues relating to the stay-related factors are no different now than they were in April of 2021, when the Court denied Defendant's original motion to stay. Defendant does note that it will soon be required to submit invalidity contentions on October 15, 2021, which will surely require time and effort. But in light of the circumstances here (including the statistical unlikelihood of prevailing on a Section 101 motion to dismiss as to each of the four separate patents-in-suit), the Court concludes a stay is not warranted. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 9/22/2021. (dlb) |
| Sep 17, 2021 | 60 | Letter (Main Document) (3) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Opposition to Defendant's Renewed Motion to Stay - re [56] Letter. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Sep 17, 2021 | 60 | Letter (Exhibit 1) (6) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Opposition to Defendant's Renewed Motion to Stay - re [56] Letter. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Sep 15, 2021 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [58] STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for Plaintiff to respond to Defendant's Renewed Request for a Stay to 9/17/2021 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 9/15/2021. (dlb) |
| Sep 15, 2021 | 58 | Stipulation to EXTEND Time (2) Docket Text: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for Plaintiff to respond to Defendant's Renewed Request for a Stay to 9/17/2021 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) |
| Sep 15, 2021 | N/A | Order Setting Hearing on Motion (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER Resetting Hearing on Motion: Due to a scheduling conflict, the hearing on Defendant's pending motion to dismiss, (D.I. 17), is hereby rescheduled for October 15, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 9/15/2021. (dlb) |
| Sep 13, 2021 | N/A | Order Setting Hearing on Motion (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed Defendant's September 10, 2021 letter, (D.I. 56), hereby ORDERS as follows: (1) Oral argument on Defendant's pending motion to dismiss, (D.I. 17), is hereby scheduled for October 6, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. and will be held via videoconference using the Microsoft Teams platform. By no later than September 29, 2021, the parties shall send an e-mail to the Court's Courtroom Deputy, Ms. Benyo, indicating the names and e-mail addresses of all individuals who will participate in the hearing.; and (2) With regard to Defendant's renewed request for a stay, by September 15, 2021, Plaintiff may file a responsive letter, not to exceed one (1) single-spaced page, in no less than 12-point font, outlining its position. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 9/13/2021. (dlb) |
| Sep 10, 2021 | 56 | Letter (19) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding Request to Renew Motion to Stay. (Smith, Rodger) (Main Document 56 replaced on 9/13/2021) (dlb). |
| Sep 9, 2021 | 55 | Notice of Service (2) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of (i) eBuddy's Objections and Responses to LinkedIn's First Set of Interrogatories and (ii) eBuddy's Objections and Responses to LinkedIn's First Set of Requests for Production filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Aug 30, 2021 | 54 | Notice of Service (2) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Preliminary Disclosure Pursuant to Paragraph 7.c of the Court's Scheduling Order filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Aug 24, 2021 | 53 | Notice of Service (3) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Objections and Responses to Plaintiff eBuddy's First Interrogatories and Requests for Production - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Aug 5, 2021 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [52] MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Christopher Kao and Brock S. Weber filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 8/5/2021. (dlb) |
| Aug 5, 2021 | 52 | Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice (5) Docket Text: MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Christopher Kao and Brock S. Weber - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Jul 21, 2021 | 51 | Notice of Service (3) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff eBuddy Technologies B.V.; and (2) Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's First Set of Requests for Production to Plaintiff eBuddy Technologies B.V. filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Jul 19, 2021 | 50 | Notice of Service (3) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Initial Disclosures Under the ESI Order; and (2) Disclosure of Core Technical Documents filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Jul 9, 2021 | 49 | Notice of Service (2) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's Initial ESI Disclosures filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Jul 6, 2021 | 48 | Notice of Service (2) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of eBuddy's First Interrogatories and Requests for Production to LinkedIn filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| Jun 24, 2021 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [47] Stipulation Governing the Discovery of Electronically Stored Information ("ESI") filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 6/24/2021. (dlb) |
| Jun 24, 2021 | 47 | Stipulation (13) Docket Text: STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order Governing the Discovery of Electronically Stored Information ("ESI") by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) |
| Jun 23, 2021 | N/A | Discovery Conference (0) Docket Text: Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Christopher J. Burke - Discovery Conference held on 6/23/2021. After hearing the parties regarding the dispute, (D.I. 44), the Court resolved the dispute on the record. The transcript shall serve as the substance of the Court's Order.(Clerk, Sforza) APPEARANCES: M. Farnan and S. Schlather for Plaintiff; R. Smith, II and B. Weber for Defendant. (Court Reporter Stacy Vickers, Hawkins Reporting) (dlb) |
| Jun 21, 2021 | 46 | Letter (Main Document) (4) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Response to Defendant's June 14, 2021 Letter - re [45] Letter. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Jun 21, 2021 | 46 | Letter (Exhibit A) (14) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Response to Defendant's June 14, 2021 Letter - re [45] Letter. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A)(Farnan, Michael) |
| Jun 14, 2021 | 44 | Motion for Miscellaneous Relief (1) Docket Text: Joint MOTION for Teleconference to Resolve Discovery Dispute - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Jun 14, 2021 | 45 | Letter (Main Document) (4) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding Email Discovery Dispute. (Attachments: # (1) Exs. 1-4)(Smith, Rodger) |
| Jun 14, 2021 | 45 | Letter (Exs. 1-4) (30) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding Email Discovery Dispute. (Attachments: # (1) Exs. 1-4)(Smith, Rodger) |
| Jun 8, 2021 | N/A | Order Setting Teleconference (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER Setting Teleconference: The Court has reviewed the parties' June 7, 2021 letter requesting a discovery teleconference. (D.I. 42) The Court hereby ORDERS that the procedures for resolving a discovery dispute set out in the Scheduling Order will be modified as follows with regard to the dispute: (1) A discovery dispute teleconference is set for June 23, 2021 at 12:00 p.m. before Judge Christopher J. Burke.; (2) By no later than June 14, 2021, the party seeking relief shall file with the Court an opening letter brief, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining the issue it is raising and its position on that issue.; (3) By no later than June 21, 2021, the responding party may file an answering letter brief, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining its reasons for its opposition to the opening letter brief.; (4) The parties shall jointly file a Motion For Teleconference To Resolve Discovery Dispute.; (5) By no later than June 21, 2021, the parties shall jointly provide the Court's Courtroom Deputy, Ms. Benyo, with a dial-in number via e-mail to use for the call.; (6) The parties should also consult Judge Burke's "Guidelines for Discovery Disputes," which is found in the "Guidelines" tab on Judge Burke's portion of the District Court's website.; and (7) It is possible that the Court may choose to resolve the disputes prior to the telephone conference. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 6/8/2021. (dlb) |
| Jun 7, 2021 | 41 | Proposed Order (30) Docket Text: PROPOSED ORDER Proposed Protective Order by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) |
| Jun 7, 2021 | 42 | Letter (1) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding request for the scheduling of a discovery teleconference. (Smith, Rodger) |
| Jun 3, 2021 | 40 | Notice of Service (3) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant LinkedIn Corporation's Initial Disclosures - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Jun 2, 2021 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [38] STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for (1) a proposed form of ESI Order and (2) a proposed form of Protective Order to June 7, 2021 filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 6/2/2021. (dlb) |
| Jun 2, 2021 | 38 | Stipulation to EXTEND Time (2) Docket Text: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for (1) a proposed form of ESI Order and (2) a proposed form of Protective Order to June 7, 2021 - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) |
| Jun 2, 2021 | 39 | Notice of Service (2) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff eBuddy Technologies B.V.'s Initial Disclosures filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| May 24, 2021 | N/A | CORRECTING ENTRY: (0) Docket Text: CORRECTING ENTRY: Oral Order entered today regarding mediation has been removed from this docket as entered in this case in error. (dlb) |
| May 17, 2021 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [37] STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to EXTEND the deadlines for Initial Disclosures pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1), Proposed ESI Order, and Proposed Protective Order to 6/2/2021 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 5/17/2021. (mlc) |
| May 17, 2021 | 37 | Stipulation to EXTEND Time (2) Docket Text: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to EXTEND the deadlines for Initial Disclosures pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1), Proposed ESI Order, and Proposed Protective Order to 6/2/2021 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Michael) |
| May 14, 2021 | 36 | Request for Oral Argument (2) Docket Text: REQUEST for Oral Argument re [17] MOTION to Dismiss, by LinkedIn Corporation . (Smith, Rodger) Modified on 9/29/2021 (nms). |
| May 10, 2021 | 34 | Notice of Service (2) Docket Text: NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Disclosure of Accused Products, Asserted Patents and Damages Model filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..(Farnan, Brian) |
| May 10, 2021 | 35 | Reply Brief (21) Docket Text: REPLY BRIEF re [17] MOTION to Dismiss, filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) Modified on 4/8/2022 (nms). |
| May 4, 2021 | N/A | Case Referred to Mediation (0) Docket Text: CASE REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Mary Pat Thynge for Mediation. Please see Standing Order dated January 20, 2016, regarding disclosure of confidential ADR communications. A link to the standing order is provided here for your convenience at https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/forms/StandingOrderforADR-Mediation.pdf (Taylor, Daniel) |
| May 4, 2021 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: This matter has been referred to Chief Magistrate Judge Mary Pat Thynge for ADR. Should any party (or all parties) desire to discuss mediation and its timing, the party(ies) shall contact Judge Thynge and her Law Clerk, Daniel Taylor (daniel_taylor@ded.uscourts.gov), to request that a teleconference be scheduled. Ordered by by Judge Mary Pat Thynge on 5/4/2021. (Taylor, Daniel) |
| May 3, 2021 | 33 | Scheduling Order (20) Docket Text: SCHEDULING ORDER: Case referred to the Magistrate Judge for the purpose of exploring ADR. Joinder of Parties due by 6/4/2021. Amended Pleadings due by 6/4/2021. Fact Discovery completed by 7/7/2022. Expert Discovery due by 11/18/2022. Status Report due by 2/21/2022. Dispositive Motions due by 12/1/2022. A Markman Hearing is set for 3/16/2022 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 2A before Judge Christopher J. Burke. A Pretrial Conference is set for 6/5/2023 at 04:30 PM in Courtroom 4A before Judge Maryellen Noreika. A Jury Trial is set for 6/12/2023 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 4A before Judge Maryellen Noreika. Please refer to Order for further details and deadlines. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 5/2/2021. (dlb) |
| Apr 30, 2021 | 32 | Proposed Order (Main Document) (20) Docket Text: PROPOSED ORDER Proposed Scheduling Order by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke)(Farnan, Brian) |
| Apr 30, 2021 | 32 | Proposed Order (Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke) (1) Docket Text: PROPOSED ORDER Proposed Scheduling Order by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke)(Farnan, Brian) |
| Apr 29, 2021 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [31] STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for Defendant LinkedIn Corporation to file its reply brief in support of its motion to dismiss (D.I. 17) to May 10, 2021 filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 4/29/2021. (dlb) |
| Apr 28, 2021 | 30 | Letter (1) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Maryellen Noreika from Brian E. Farnan regarding Magistrate Consent Inquiry. (Farnan, Brian) |
| Apr 28, 2021 | 31 | Stipulation to EXTEND Time (1) Docket Text: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for Defendant LinkedIn Corporation to file its reply brief in support of its motion to dismiss (D.I. 17) to May 10, 2021 - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 26, 2021 | N/A | Scheduling Conference (0) Docket Text: Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Christopher J. Burke: Case Management/Scheduling Conference and Oral Argument held on April 26, 2021. The Court heard the parties' arguments regarding case management/scheduling and the Motion to Stay (the "Motion"), (D.I. 23). After hearing the parties regarding the dispute, the Court DENIED the Motion and ORDERED the parties to submit a revised proposed scheduling order by no later than April 30, 2021. The transcript shall serve as the substance of the Court's order. (Clerk: Sforza) APPEARANCES: M.J. Farnan and S. Schlather for Plaintiff; R. Smith, II, C. Kao and B. Weber for Defendant. (Court Reporter Stacy Ingram, Hawkins Reporting) (dlb) |
| Apr 23, 2021 | 29 | Letter (3) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II regarding motion to stay - re [23] MOTION to Stay . (Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 22, 2021 | 28 | Order (2) Docket Text: ORDER: On or before April 28, 2021, the parties shall either (1) file an executed Form AO 85A Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Dispositive Motion to a Magistrate Judge that sets forth the parties' consent to consideration of the pending Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (D.I. [17]) by a Magistrate Judge or (2) file a joint letter indicating that both parties do not so consent. If there is no consent, the letter shall not indicate which party or parties did not consent. Signed by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 4/22/2021. (mdb) |
| Apr 20, 2021 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [25] Stipulation to extend page limits filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 4/20/2021. (dlb) |
| Apr 20, 2021 | 27 | Letter (5) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Michael J. Farnan regarding Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay - re [23] MOTION to Stay . (Farnan, Michael) |
| Apr 19, 2021 | 25 | Stipulation (1) Docket Text: STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Extend Page Limits by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) |
| Apr 19, 2021 | 26 | Answering Brief in Opposition (Main Document) (30) Docket Text: ANSWERING BRIEF in Opposition re [17] MOTION to Dismiss, filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..Reply Brief due date per Local Rules is 4/26/2021. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 9/29/2021 (nms). |
| Apr 19, 2021 | 26 | Answering Brief in Opposition (Exhibit 1) (30) Docket Text: ANSWERING BRIEF in Opposition re [17] MOTION to Dismiss, filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..Reply Brief due date per Local Rules is 4/26/2021. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 9/29/2021 (nms). |
| Apr 19, 2021 | 26 | Answering Brief in Opposition (Exhibit 2) (2) Docket Text: ANSWERING BRIEF in Opposition re [17] MOTION to Dismiss, filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V..Reply Brief due date per Local Rules is 4/26/2021. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 9/29/2021 (nms). |
| Apr 13, 2021 | 23 | Motion to Stay (2) Docket Text: MOTION to Stay - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 13, 2021 | 24 | Letter (4) Docket Text: Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Rodger D. Smith II - re [23] MOTION to Stay . (Smith, Rodger) |
| Apr 7, 2021 | N/A | Order Setting Scheduling Conference (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER Setting Telephonic Scheduling Conference: The Court, having reviewed the parties' 4/5/2021 proposed scheduling order and attached letter, (D.I. 20; D.I. 20-1), hereby ORDERS as follows: (1) A Case Management/Scheduling Conference is set for 4/26/2021 at 02:00 PM before Judge Christopher J. Burke.; (2) By no later than 4/22/2021, the parties shall jointly provide the Court's Courtroom Deputy, Ms. Benyo, with a dial-in number via e-mail to use for the call.; (3) By no later than 4/13/2021, Defendant shall file its Motion to Stay and an opening letter brief, not to exceed three (3) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining its reasons for requesting a stay.; (4) By no later than 4/20/2021, Plaintiff shall file with the Court an answering letter brief, not to exceed three (3) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining its reasons for opposing Defendants request for a stay.; (5) By no later than 4/23/2021, Defendant may file with the Court a reply brief, not to exceed one (1) single-spaced page, in no less than 12-point font, in response to Plaintiff's answering letter brief.; and (6) The Court will address Defendant's Motion to Stay at the Case Management/Scheduling Conference, and it will decide then whether to enter a schedule in the case. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 4/7/2021. (dlb) |
| Apr 5, 2021 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED D.I. [19] STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME (i) for Plaintiff to respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and (ii) for Defendant to file its Reply Brief to (i) 4/19/2021 and (ii) 5/3/2021 filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 4/5/2021. (dlb) |
| Apr 5, 2021 | 20 | Proposed Order (Main Document) (20) Docket Text: PROPOSED ORDER Proposed Scheduling Order by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke)(Farnan, Brian) |
| Apr 5, 2021 | 20 | Proposed Order (Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke) (3) Docket Text: PROPOSED ORDER Proposed Scheduling Order by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke)(Farnan, Brian) |
| Apr 5, 2021 | 21 | Statement (4) Docket Text: Case Management Checklist, by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) Modified on 9/29/2021 (nms). |
| Apr 1, 2021 | 19 | Stipulation to EXTEND Time (1) Docket Text: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME (i) for Plaintiff to respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and (ii) for Defendant to file its Reply Brief to (i) 4/19/2021 and (ii) 5/3/2021 - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) |
| Mar 29, 2021 | N/A | Motions Referred (0) Docket Text: MOTION REFERRED: [17] MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint Motion referred to Christopher J. Burke.(dlb) |
| Mar 29, 2021 | 17 | Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (3) Docket Text: MOTION to Dismiss - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) Modified on 9/29/2021 (nms). |
| Mar 29, 2021 | 18 | Opening Brief in Support (Main Document) (27) Docket Text: OPENING BRIEF in Support re [17] MOTION to Dismiss, filed by LinkedIn Corporation.Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 4/12/2021. (Attachments: # (1) Appendix A)(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 9/29/2021 (nms). |
| Mar 29, 2021 | 18 | Opening Brief in Support (Appendix A) (4) Docket Text: OPENING BRIEF in Support re [17] MOTION to Dismiss, filed by LinkedIn Corporation.Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 4/12/2021. (Attachments: # (1) Appendix A)(Smith, Rodger) Modified on 9/29/2021 (nms). |
| Mar 4, 2021 | N/A | Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Christopher J. Burke - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is referred to Magistrate Judge Christopher J. Burke to hear and resolve all pre-trial matters up to and including expert discovery matters (but not including summary judgment motions, Daubert motions, pre-trial motions in limine or the pre-trial conference), subject to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and any further Order of the Court. All subsequent filings in this action shall be captioned as follows: Civil Action No. 20-1501-MN-CJB. ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 3/4/2021. (dlw) |
| Mar 4, 2021 | N/A | Remark re Newer Attorneys (0) Docket Text: REMARK: The parties should be aware that the Court encourages the participation of newer attorneys in courtroom proceedings and at oral argument. Please see the Court's Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities for Newer Attorneys, a link to which is provided here for the parties' convenience:http://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/forms/StandingOrder2017.pdf (dlb) |
| Mar 4, 2021 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall meet and confer and discuss, in person and/or by telephone, each of the matters listed on Judge Burkes Case Management Checklist ("Checklist"). Within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, the parties shall jointly file the following: (i) a copy of the Checklist, indicating the names of Lead Counsel and Delaware Counsel for each party; (ii) a proposed Scheduling Order, which is consistent with Judge Burke's "Rule 16 Scheduling Order Patent" up through and including paragraph number 16 (i.e., regarding the portions of the case schedule leading up to but not including the case dispositive motion stage of the case) and that is consistent with paragraphs 15-22 of Judge Noreika's "Patent Scheduling Order - Non-ANDA"(i.e., regarding the portions of the case schedule from the case dispositive motion stage through post-trial motions); and (iii) a letter, not to exceed three pages, that contains the following: (a) a description of what this case is about; (b) the parties positions regarding any disputes in the proposed Scheduling Order, and (c) a list of the three most significant topics (other than Scheduling Order disputes) discussed during the parties' review of the Checklist items, along with a brief description as to what was discussed as to those topics. Thereafter, the Court may schedule a Case Management Conference/Rule 16 Scheduling Conference to be held with Judge Burke. The Checklist and both Scheduling Orders can be found on Judge Burke's/Judge Noreika's portions of the District Court's website. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/4/2021. (dlb) |
| Feb 26, 2021 | N/A | Oral Order (0) Docket Text: ORAL ORDER re [9] MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim - In light of [14] Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, the Court DENIES as MOOT [9] Defendant's Motion to Dismiss as it relates to [1] the Original Complaint. ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 2/26/2021. (dlw) |
| Feb 25, 2021 | 14 | Amended Complaint* (1) |
| Feb 25, 2021 | 14 | Amended Complaint (Main Document) (30) Docket Text: First AMENDED COMPLAINT against LinkedIn Corporation- filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Exhibit 5)(Farnan, Brian) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/26/2021: # (6) Redline Comparison) (dlw). |
| Feb 25, 2021 | 14 | Amended Complaint (Exhibit 1) (17) Docket Text: First AMENDED COMPLAINT against LinkedIn Corporation- filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Exhibit 5)(Farnan, Brian) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/26/2021: # (6) Redline Comparison) (dlw). |
| Feb 25, 2021 | 14 | Amended Complaint (Exhibit 2) (18) Docket Text: First AMENDED COMPLAINT against LinkedIn Corporation- filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Exhibit 5)(Farnan, Brian) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/26/2021: # (6) Redline Comparison) (dlw). |
| Feb 25, 2021 | 14 | Amended Complaint (Exhibit 3) (21) Docket Text: First AMENDED COMPLAINT against LinkedIn Corporation- filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Exhibit 5)(Farnan, Brian) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/26/2021: # (6) Redline Comparison) (dlw). |
| Feb 25, 2021 | 14 | Amended Complaint (Exhibit 4) (21) Docket Text: First AMENDED COMPLAINT against LinkedIn Corporation- filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Exhibit 5)(Farnan, Brian) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/26/2021: # (6) Redline Comparison) (dlw). |
| Feb 25, 2021 | 14 | Amended Complaint (Exhibit 5) (30) Docket Text: First AMENDED COMPLAINT against LinkedIn Corporation- filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Exhibit 5)(Farnan, Brian) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/26/2021: # (6) Redline Comparison) (dlw). |
| Feb 25, 2021 | 14 | Amended Complaint (Redline Comparison) (30) Docket Text: First AMENDED COMPLAINT against LinkedIn Corporation- filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Exhibit 5)(Farnan, Brian) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/26/2021: # (6) Redline Comparison) (dlw). |
| Feb 2, 2021 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED re [13] STIPULATION TO EXTEND the deadlines for: (i) Plaintiff to respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss; (ii) Defendant to file its Reply Brief; and (iii) Defendant to respond to an Amended Complaint if filed to (i) 2/25/2021; (ii) 3/18/2021; and (iii) 30 days after filed (Set Briefing Schedule: re [9] MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim - Answering Brief due 2/25/2021. Reply Brief due 3/18/2021). ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 2/2/2021. (dlw) |
| Feb 1, 2021 | 13 | Stipulation to EXTEND Time (2) Docket Text: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to EXTEND the deadlines for: (i) Plaintiff to respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss; (ii) Defendant to file its Reply Brief; and (iii) Defendant to respond to an Amended Complaint if filed to (i) 2/25/2021; (ii) 3/18/2021; and (iii) 30 days after filed - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) |
| Jan 21, 2021 | 9 | Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (2) Docket Text: MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) |
| Jan 21, 2021 | 10 | Opening Brief in Support (Main Document) (26) Docket Text: OPENING BRIEF in Support re [9] MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 2/4/2021. (Attachments: # (1) Appendix A)(Smith, Rodger) |
| Jan 21, 2021 | 10 | Opening Brief in Support (Appendix A) (5) Docket Text: OPENING BRIEF in Support re [9] MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim - filed by LinkedIn Corporation.Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 2/4/2021. (Attachments: # (1) Appendix A)(Smith, Rodger) |
| Jan 21, 2021 | 11 | Declaration (30) Docket Text: DECLARATION of Christopher Kao re [9] MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) Modified on 1/22/2021 (dlw). |
| Jan 21, 2021 | 12 | Disclosure Statement (2) Docket Text: Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: identifying Corporate Parent Microsoft Corporation for LinkedIn Corporation filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) |
| Dec 3, 2020 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED re [8] STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to move, answer, or otherwise respond to the Complaint to January 21, 2021 (Set/Reset Answer Deadlines: LinkedIn Corporation answer due 1/21/2020). ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 12/3/2020. (dlw) |
| Dec 3, 2020 | 8 | Stipulation to EXTEND Time (1) Docket Text: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to move, answer, or otherwise respond to the Complaint to January 21, 2021 - filed by LinkedIn Corporation. (Smith, Rodger) |
| Nov 30, 2020 | 7 | Disclosure Statement (2) Docket Text: Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: identifying Other Affiliate Koninklijke KPN N.V., Other Affiliate eBuddy Holding B.V., Other Affiliate KPN B.V. for eBuddy Technologies B.V. filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) |
| Nov 24, 2020 | 6 | Summons Returned Executed (2) Docket Text: SUMMONS Returned Executed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. LinkedIn Corporation served on 11/16/2020, answer due 12/7/2020. (Farnan, Brian) |
| Nov 18, 2020 | N/A | Add Attorneys Pro Hac Vice (0) Docket Text: Pro Hac Vice Attorney Stephen F. Schlather for eBuddy Technologies B.V. added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. (mal) |
| Nov 13, 2020 | N/A | SO ORDERED (0) Docket Text: SO ORDERED re [5] MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Stephen F. Schlather filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 11/13/2020. (dlw) |
| Nov 13, 2020 | 5 | Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice (2) Docket Text: MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Stephen F. Schlather - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V.. (Farnan, Brian) |
| Nov 12, 2020 | N/A | Case Assigned/Reassigned (0) Docket Text: Case Assigned to Judge Maryellen Noreika. Please include the initials of the Judge (MN) after the case number on all documents filed. (rjb) |
| Nov 6, 2020 | 1 | Complaint* (1) |
| Nov 6, 2020 | 1 | Complaint (Main Document) (30) Docket Text: COMPLAINT for Patent Infringement filed with Jury Demand against LinkedIn Corporation - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. (Filing fee $400, receipt number ADEDC-3316543.) - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Civil Cover Sheet)(kmd) |
| Nov 6, 2020 | 1 | Complaint (Exhibit 1) (17) Docket Text: COMPLAINT for Patent Infringement filed with Jury Demand against LinkedIn Corporation - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. (Filing fee $400, receipt number ADEDC-3316543.) - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Civil Cover Sheet)(kmd) |
| Nov 6, 2020 | 1 | Complaint (Exhibit 2) (18) Docket Text: COMPLAINT for Patent Infringement filed with Jury Demand against LinkedIn Corporation - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. (Filing fee $400, receipt number ADEDC-3316543.) - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Civil Cover Sheet)(kmd) |
| Nov 6, 2020 | 1 | Complaint (Exhibit 3) (21) Docket Text: COMPLAINT for Patent Infringement filed with Jury Demand against LinkedIn Corporation - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. (Filing fee $400, receipt number ADEDC-3316543.) - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Civil Cover Sheet)(kmd) |
| Nov 6, 2020 | 1 | Complaint (Exhibit 4) (21) Docket Text: COMPLAINT for Patent Infringement filed with Jury Demand against LinkedIn Corporation - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. (Filing fee $400, receipt number ADEDC-3316543.) - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Civil Cover Sheet)(kmd) |
| Nov 6, 2020 | 1 | Complaint (Civil Cover Sheet) (1) Docket Text: COMPLAINT for Patent Infringement filed with Jury Demand against LinkedIn Corporation - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. (Filing fee $400, receipt number ADEDC-3316543.) - filed by eBuddy Technologies B.V. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1, # (2) Exhibit 2, # (3) Exhibit 3, # (4) Exhibit 4, # (5) Civil Cover Sheet)(kmd) |
| Nov 6, 2020 | 2 | Magistrate Consent Forms (3) Docket Text: Notice, Consent and Referral forms re: U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (kmd) |
| Nov 6, 2020 | 3 | Patent/Trademark Report to Commissioner (1) Docket Text: Report to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) US 8,510,395 B2 ; US 9,584,453 B2 ; US 8,230,135 B2 ; US 8,402,179 B1. (kmd) |
| Nov 6, 2020 | 4 | Summons Issued - Electronic (2) Docket Text: Summonses Issued (please complete the top portion of the form and print out for use/service). (kmd) |
