Impinj, Inc. v. NXP USA, Inc.

Background

The court stated that it had granted a motion for a new trial concerning the ’302 Patent. This order established the schedule and procedures for that retrial. The order did not decide the parties’ underlying patent dispute.

Orders for the Retrial

The retrial was set for March 18, 2024, at 8:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1 of the United States District Court in Oakland, California. Earlier orders governing the trial process remained in effect unless the parties raised questions about their applicability at the next pretrial conference.

Because the retrial would be narrower, each party was allotted eight hours to present its case, including opening and closing arguments. The next pretrial conference was set for January 31, 2024, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 1. New witness and exhibit lists were due seven business days before that conference. The parties also had to email a joint alphabetical list of witnesses, attorneys, and others involved in the trial for use with prospective jurors.

The court ordered that eight jurors and no alternates would be seated, and it set three peremptory challenges for each side. Any objection under Batson v. Kentucky concerning improper use of jury challenges had to be made timely, with argument held outside the jury panel’s presence.

The parties had to lodge any offers of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 fourteen days before trial. They also had to provide updated documents for juror binders fourteen days before trial, including a glossary of technical terms, materials identifying disputed patent-claim language and relevant claim constructions, any useful common timeline, and copies of the patents highlighting or boxing the claims at issue.

Previously agreed procedural trial stipulations remained effective. The parties had to contact the court immediately if they had objections to those stipulations. After trial, they would review the exhibits, provide an index of admitted exhibits to the jury before closing argument, and complete the trial-exhibit certification. The parties also had to meet and confer about whether additional evidence concerning injunctive relief would be offered to the court after the jury began deliberating.

Disposition

The court entered this pretrial order setting the retrial date and governing procedures. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers did not issue a merits ruling on the patent dispute in this order.