S.D. Tex. P. R. 2-1 — Procedure: the court's own rule, verbatim from RULES OF PRACTICE FOR PATENT CASES IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS ((Amended April 18, 2022)), official PDF, sha-custodied. Court-level requirement: applies in every case before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas alongside the federal rules and any judge-specific procedures.
(a) Parties’ Preparation for Initial Case Management Conference. In addition to the matters covered by FED. R. CIV. P. 26, the parties must confer and address in their Joint Case Management Report the following topics: (1) any proposed modification of the schedule provided in the Scheduling Order Template, which is available on the District’s website; (2) a plan for completing electronic discovery; (3) the need for presenting technical tutorials to the presiding judge and the mode for such presentations (i.e., live testimony, video presentations) at or before the claim construction hearing; (4) any deviations from and additions to the form protective order (available at the District’s website); (5) whether any party desires to present live testimony at the claim construction hearing; (6) the need for and any specific limits on discovery relating to claim construction, including depositions of fact and expert witnesses; (7) the order of presentation at the claim construction hearing; (8) the scheduling of a claim construction prehearing conference after the “Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement” provided in P.R. 4-3 has been filed; (9) whether pre- or post-AIA law regarding 35 U.S.C. § 102 is applicable to each patent-in-suit; and (10) whether the presiding judge should authorize the filing under seal of any documents containing confidential information, (b) Insufficient Information. If warranted by the patent(s) or products in issue, the party claiming patent infringement (“claimant”) may include in the Joint Case Management Report a statement that the claimant in good faith lacks sufficient information concerning the opponent’s products or processes to provide the necessary specificity for the Preliminary Infringement Contentions (see P.R. 3-1). If the presiding judge orders, the opponent within 21 days must produce to the claimant sufficient information concerning each product or process of the type or class specified by the claimant in its statement to enable the claimant to determine whether to claim that the product or process infringes. Neither the claimant’s statement nor the opponent’s production will be an admission or evidence of infringement or noninfringement. These steps are solely to determine what is alleged to be infringing. (c) Case Management Conference and Scheduling Order. At the initial case management conference, after considering the parties’ Joint Case Management Report, the presiding judge will enter a Case Management Scheduling Order (“Scheduling Order”). (d) Further Case Management Conferences. If some or all of the matters provided under P.R. 2-1(a) are not resolved or decided at the initial case management conference, the parties must propose dates for further case management conferences.
(a) Parties’ Preparation for Initial Case Management Conference. In addition to the matters covered by FED. R. CIV. P. 26, the parties must confer and address in their Joint Case Management Report the following topics: (1) any proposed modification of the schedule provided in the