ORDER

JOSEPH N. LAPLANTE, District Judge.

On March 26, 2013, this court issued an order consolidating Media Digital, Inc. v. Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc., No. 12-cv-313 (the "main case"), with Media Digital, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 13-cv-35, and Media Digital, Inc. v. Vizio, Inc., No. 13-cv-57. The court subsequently issued orders inviting the parties to express their positions regarding the consolidation of those three cases with Media Digital, Inc. v. Huawei Technologies USA Inc., No. 13-cv-166, Media Digital, Inc. v. Panasonic Corporation of North America, No. 13-cv-167, and Media Digital, Inc. v. Viewsonic Corporation, No. 13-cv-168. After due consideration of the parties' submissions, the abovecaptioned cases will be consolidated for pretrial proceedings up to and including summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42. Each case will be tried separately. Media Digital, Inc. v. Viewsonic Corporation, No. 13-cv-168, will be reassigned to the undersigned judge.

So the consolidation is workable for both the parties and the court, the parties shall continue to file dispositive motions and their responses, as well as documents related to scheduling, discovery, infringement, invalidity, and claim construction— including all filings required by this court's Supplemental Rules for Patent Cases—on the docket for the main case, and the court will observe the same practice. If the cases remain unresolved as trial approaches, trial and final pretrial filings, such as those required by Local Rule 16.2, shall be filed solely on the dockets for the individual cases to which they apply. Any notice of settlement or stipulation of dismissal shall be filed both in the main case and in the individual case to which it applies.

The parties shall confer and, on or before June 24, 2013, shall file a joint proposal for altering the discovery plan in the main case (approved by the court on January 18, 2013) in light of the consolidation. If there are provisions on which the parties are unable to reach agreement, their filing shall identify the areas of disagreement and the parties' competing proposals; the court will not accept separate filings. The protective order in the main case, dated January 3, 2013, shall remain in place following consolidation. If any party wishes to propose an alteration to that order, it shall raise that issue in the parties' joint proposal.

SO ORDERED.