STIPULATED MOTION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY CUT-OFF

JAMES L. ROBART, District Judge.

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 16(b)(5), and subject to the Court's approval, Plaintiffs California Expanded Metal Products Company ("CEMCO") and Clarkwestern Dietrich Building Systems LLC, d.b.a. ClarkDietrich. Building Systems ("ClarkDietrich") (collectively "Plaintiffs"), and Defendants James A. Klein, BlazeFrame Industries, Ltd., and Safti-Seal, Inc. (collectively, "Defendants"), by and through their counsel of record, move the Court to extend Discovery cut-off from June 28, 2019 to July 29, 2019 and related dates as set forth below. The requested extension will not affect the Dispositive Motion cut-off of August 6, 2019, the Pretrial conference set for November 25, 2019, or the Trial scheduled for December 2, 2019. Good cause exists for the extension as follows.

STIPULATED MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY CUT-OFF.

Based on the Court's recent Claim Construction Order, Plaintiffs request an extension of the Discovery cut-off because Plaintiffs will file a motion for partial summary judgment on their patent infringement claims by May 10, 2019,1 the result of which could partially obviate the need for expert discovery.

More specifically, on April 17, 2019 the Court issued a 35-page Claim Construction Order, construing in detail the four patents at issue.2 (Dkt. #98.) In light of the Court's Claim Construction Order, Plaintiffs diligently requested to meet and confer on the summary judgment motion on April 25, 2019, and the Parties met and conferred on May 2, 2019. (Declaration of Dylan C. Dang, ¶ 1.) Plaintiffs anticipate filing the summary judgment motion on or by May 10, 2019, with a Noting Date of June 7, 2019.

Under the Court's Scheduling Order, opening expert reports are also due on May 10, 2019. (Dang Decl., ¶ 2.) If Plaintiffs prevail on the patent infringement claims, it would obviate the need for the Parties to retain technical experts to opine on infringement. (Patent validity is not at issue in the case. (Dkt. #91).) The Parties could thus devote their resources and focus their efforts on the preparation of expert reports on the issue of damages. On the other hand, if the patent infringement claims are not resolved on summary judgment, the Parties request an extension of discovery to address the issues pertaining to both patents and damages.

Thus, subject to the Court's approval, the Parties have stipulated to extending the deadlines for discovery as follows:

The requested extension will not affect the other dates in the case. As Plaintiffs intend to file a dispositive motion well before the August 6, 2019 deadline, the extension of expert discovery will not likely have any impact on the dispositive motion cut-off deadline. The trial scheduled at the end of the year will also not be affected. Therefore, based on the foregoing, the parties respectfully request that the Court GRANT this stipulated motion.

The Court cautions The parties That it will not grant any further extensions of the pretrial deadlines in this matter. Should The parties seek to continue the trial date, They may ask the court to move This matter to the end of the trial calendar.

IT IS SO ORDERED.