Sonos, Inc. v. D&M Holdings, Inc.

Sonos, Inc. v. D&M Holdings, Inc.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

On November 17, 2017, the Court held a telephonic pretrial conference to discuss the proposed joint pretrial order, the parties' motions in limine, a dispute regarding the election of prior art, and the Court's proposed trial procedures for the bellwether trial scheduled to begin on December 11, 2017. This order summarizes the Court's rulings made during that conference, and addresses the issues the Court took under submission.

1. Regarding the parties' disputes concerning the number of prior art references that D&M is permitted to raise at trial, see Dkt. Nos. 437, 439, the Court ruled that the UPnP protocol and the "D&M System" may each be considered a single reference for purposes of the Court's limitation of three prior art references per patent. The Court made no ruling as to whether either system may be considered a single reference for purposes of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 or 103.

2. Sonos will not be permitted to present a doctrine of equivalents theory of infringement at trial, as it did not include such allegations in its final infringement contentions, except in the form of a boilerplate reservation of right to assert [*3]  the doctrine of equivalents at some later point. See Sycamore IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Corp., No. 2:16-cv-588, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167297,2017 WL 4517953, at *3 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 10, 2017) (boilerplate allegations of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents are insufficient); Comcast Cable Commc'ns, LLC v. OpenTV, Inc., No. C 16-6180, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94117,2017 WL 2630088, at *5 (N.D. Cal. June 19, 2017) (same); Baltimore Aircoil Co. v. SPX Cooling Techs. Inc., No. CCB-13-2053, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111934,2016 WL 4426681, at *15 (D. Md. Aug. 22, 2016) ("[P]lace-holder boilerplate language will not suffice" to preserve a doctrine of equivalents theory of infringement.); Best Med. Int'l, Inc. v. Accuray, Inc., No. 2:10-cv-1043, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91784, 2013 WL 3305478, at *2-3 (W.D. Pa. July 1, 2013) (contentions regarding the doctrine of equivalents cannot be "reserved" until the close of discovery).

3. The Court granted in part and denied in part Sonos's motions in limine.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.