Free Scheduling Order - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

_ W Case 1:04-cv-00833-KAJ Document 82 Filed 08/05/2005 Page 1 of 2
IN TI·IE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
l*`OR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
p
Puatwtacta a uptown eompanv, Lu; 1 p
Plaintiff, (`f`- A if i n if
v' Civil Action No. 04-833 KA]
SICOR, INC., and
SICOR PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
Defendants.
STIPULATED AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER
IT IS HEREBY stipulated by the parties, subject to the a_pproval ofthe Court. that
paragraph 3(d) of the scheduling ordered entered on November 2, 2004 shall be modified as
follows:
Disclosure of Expert Testimony. Unless otherwise agreed to by the parties, they
shall serve and file their initial Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) disclosures of expert
testimony on issues on which they bear the burden of proofi including for Plaintiffany report on
infringement and for Defendants any reports on invalidity, on or before August 15, 2005, eighty
days before the date ofthe completion of discovery and shall serve and file Federal Rule ofCivil
Procedure 26(a)(2) disclosures of expert testimony on issues on which they do not bear the
burden ofproof, including for Plaintiffany report opposing Defendants’ reports on invalidity and
for Defendants any reports opposing Plaintiff’s report on infringement, on or before September
23, 2005, forty-two clays before the date for completion of discovery. If plaintiff files a report
addressing secondary factors of nonobviousness, defendants may file a report, which shall be
limited to addressing those secondary factors, on or before October 7, 2005, twenty eight days
before the date for completion of fact discovery. Plaintiff shall serve and file its initial Federal

Case 1:04-cv-00833-KAJ Document 82 Filed 08/05/2005 Page 2 of 2
F J
Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) disclosures of expert testimony on issues related to damages on
or belbre September 15, 2005. Defendants shall serve and file their responsive Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) disclosures of expert testimony on issues related to damages on or
before October 24, 2005. To the extent any objection to expert testimony is made pursuant to
the principles announced in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc.. 509 U.S. 579 (I993). it shall
be made by motion no later than the deadline for dispositive motions set forth herein, unless
otherwise ordered by the Court.
IT IS FURTHER stipulated by the parties, subject to the approval ofthe Court,
that:
Presently pending before the Court is p|aintiI`f’s motion to strike and dismiss
defendants` pleading of inequitable conduct (D.l. 55). Subsequent to a ruling on that motion, to
the extent appropriate in light of the Court”s ruling, the Court shall set deadlines for service and
tiling of expert reports, depositions and other appropriate discovery on issues related to
inequitable conduct.
MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSIIT & TUNNELL ASHBY & GEDDES
/2:/ rl/lu.•·ve!/en Nora!/ra (#32(}8@ Ar/ John G. Day (#2403)
Jack B. Blumenfeld (#IOI4) Steven J. Balick (#2I I4)
Maryellen Noreika (#3208) John G. Day (#2403)
I20l North Market Street 222 Delaware Avenue, l7“‘ Floor
P.O. Box I347 P.O. Box 1150
Wilmington, DE I9899 Wilmington, DE l9899
302-575-7282 302-654-I888
ANOr·ney.s·_/or P/rriritm" .{lrmrney.rjbr Dj ` nr rrngs , "“ . . 1
SO ORDERED this day of ` , 200 . ig _,___ h ·
United States Dis rict Judge
I.
2