ORDER

INDIRA TALWANI, District Judge.

On April 19, 2015, the court held a status conference and motion hearing on Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer and Counterclaims to First Amended Complaint for Patent Infringement and Copyright Infringement [#112].

This order memorializes and clarifies the orders set forth at the status conference/motion hearing as follows:

1. Claim Construction. This case will proceed in accordance with the previous Scheduling Order at docket #136 with the following modifications: (a) the reply briefs discussed in part 1(iii) of that Scheduling Order shall be submitted no later than June 30, 2015; and (b) the joint statement discussed in part 1(iv) of that Scheduling Order shall be submitted no later than July 14, 2015. Paragraphs 2-4 of the court's June 8, 2015 Order at docket #187 are vacated.

2. Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer and Counterclaims. In their motion, Defendants seek leave to amend their answer to assert counterclaims relating to U.S. Patent No. 8,118,709 (the "`709 Patent"), U.S. Patent. No. 8,915,823 (the "`823 Patent"), and the copyrights at issue. Defendants also seek to add a counterclaim for Tortious Interference with Business Relations against Plaintiff Cherdak based on alleged communications between Cherdak and Defendants' franchisees. Defendants' motion for leave to file an amended answer and counterclaims is ALLOWED as follows: (a) Defendants may now file the proposed amended answer and may now file the proposed counterclaims limited to the allegations relating to the `709 Patent (Counts I — II of the proposed pleading), the copyrights at issue (Count VI of the proposed pleading), and the claim for Tortious Interference with Business Relations (Count VII of the proposed pleading); (b) the court takes under advisement Defendants' motion to amend to allow allegations relating to the counterclaims concerning the `823 Patent (Counts III — V of the proposed pleading), and the parties shall inform the court by July 3, 2015 whether they have reached an agreement on Cherdak's proposed covenant not to sue based on the `823 Patent; and (c) after disclosing his communications with Defendants' current and former franchisees, Cherdak may file an early motion for summary judgment on Defendants' claim for Tortious Interference with Business Relations and Defendants may respond to such motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) specifying the discovery they require in order to present facts essential to their opposition.

3. Cherdak shall fully comply no later than June 30, 2015 with any discovery orders previously issued in this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.