UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
STANDING ORDER FOR PATENT CASES BEFORE JUDGE EUMI K. LEE
(August 28, 2025)
I. APPLICATION OF STANDING ORDER .................................................................. 1
II. PATENT DISCLOSURES ........................................................................................... 1
III. JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT................. 1
IV. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING ...................................................................... 1
V. TUTORIAL AND CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING ........................................ 3
VI. SUBSEQUENT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ........................................ 4
ATTACHMENT A ......................................................................................................................... 5
I. APPLICATION OF STANDING ORDER
Unless otherwise indicated by the Court, this Standing Order applies to all actions
asserting claims for patent infringement and for declaratory judgment of non-infringement
assigned to Judge Eumi K. Lee. Parties and counsel shall comply with all aspects of this
Standing Order, the Court’s Standing Order for Civil Cases, the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, the Civil and Patent Local Rules, and all General Orders of the Northern District of
California.
II. PATENT DISCLOSURES
Disputes regarding any party’s Patent Disclosures are referred to the assigned Magistrate
Judge. Requests to amend a party’s Infringement or Invalidity Contentions are likewise referred
to the assigned Magistrate Judge.
III. JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
A. Contents
Any disputed terms, phrases, and clauses (hereinafter, for simplicity, “terms”) shall be
designated as disputed; all other terms shall be presumed undisputed. For any term in dispute,
the parties must agree on the identity of the term. For each claim, each party shall identify with
specificity the intended impact of the proposed constructions on the merits of the case.
With regard to disputed terms, the joint statement shall list each term, each party’s
proposed construction, and support for each party’s construction side by side. Parties are
reminded that proposed constructions should be suitable for incorporation in a jury instruction.
A model statement is included as Attachment A to this Order.
B. Attachments
Parties shall attach a copy of each patent in dispute to the joint claim construction
statement. Parties shall also be prepared to make the complete prosecution history for each
patent available to the Court upon request.
IV. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING
A. Scope
As an initial matter, the Court will construe only those terms designated by the parties as
“most significant” pursuant to Patent Local Rule 4-3(c). Therefore, the Court will generally
construe no more than ten (10) terms. If multiple terms present identical issues, they may be
grouped together or a representative term may be chosen, and each group or representative term
may be considered a single term for purposes of the ten-term limit. If more than ten (10) terms
are at issue, the parties must meet and confer before the preparation of the joint claim
construction statement to narrow the number of terms that are to be construed by the Court and
shall jointly propose the ten (10) terms requiring construction.
1
B. Enlarging the Scope
If any party genuinely believes that construing more than ten (10) terms is necessary, that
party may request leave to designate additional terms for construction by filing an administrative
motion under Civil Local Rule 7-11. The requesting party must demonstrate good cause and
explain why other methods of limiting the claims at issue (such as the selection of representative
claims or any grouping of claims by issues presented) would be ineffective. If all parties agree
that more than ten (10) terms should be construed, the motion should be made jointly. Any such
request, whether unilateral or joint, must be made on or before the deadline for filing the Joint
Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement. If good cause is shown, the Court may agree to
construe all terms or schedule a second claim construction proceeding on the excess terms. If
more than ten (10) terms are submitted for construction without leave of court, the Court will
construe the first ten (10) terms listed in the joint claim construction statement and sanctions may
be imposed.
C. Format
The opening and responsive briefs shall not exceed 25 pages; the reply brief shall not
exceed fifteen (15) pages.
D. Timing
The patent holder will act as the moving party for the purposes of claim construction.
Opening briefs in support of claim construction must be filed at least six (6) weeks before the
date of the claim construction hearing, and the briefing schedule set forth at Patent Local Rule
4-5 will apply. The parties shall propose briefing deadlines in their joint initial case management
statement. The Court will issue a scheduling order following the parties’ submission.
E. Final Claim Construction Positions
Claim construction briefs must address each disputed term, but only those that are truly
disputed, following the order of the joint statement. The Court anticipates that a meaningful
meet and confer between the parties preceding the preparation of the joint claim construction
statement will eliminate the need for a party to propose in its briefs a claim construction that
differs from that proposed in the statement. While the Court encourages the parties to negotiate
mutually agreeable constructions, the parties may not propose new constructions for the first
time in reply briefs or other filings that do not afford the opposing party an opportunity to
respond. If for some exceptional reason a party needs to propose a different construction in its
brief than that found in the joint claim construction statement, that party must submit a short
request for consideration to the Court that clearly sets forth the new construction and explains the
basis for the change.
If there has been any change in the parties’ claim construction positions, the parties shall
file an amended, final joint claim construction statement at the time of filing the claim
construction reply brief. The amended statement shall include only the remaining disputed
terms, phrases, and clauses.
2
V. TUTORIAL AND CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING
A. Tutorial
The Court may schedule a tutorial to occur one to two (1-2) weeks prior to the claim
construction hearing. Each side will generally be permitted 30 to 45 minutes to present a short
summary and explanation of the technology at issue.
The purpose of the tutorial is for the parties to inform and educate the Court about the
technology involved in the case. Unless the parties agree otherwise, the patent holder makes the
first presentation. Demonstrations and visual aids are encouraged. Parties can decide who
should make the presentation. Inventors, company personnel, and individuals who work directly
with the technology are often good candidates. No argument or cross-examination will be
permitted, but the Court may pose questions to parties and witnesses. Parties may not use or rely
on statements made at the tutorial in the litigation. If the parties agree to make a joint
presentation, the Court will entertain requests for additional time. Prior to the tutorial, the parties
shall contact the Courtroom Deputy via email @cand.uscourts.gov to arrange to test any audio-
visual equipment if needed.
B. Prehearing Conference
Prehearing conferences generally are not held. However, either party may request a
telephone or video conference within two (2) weeks prior to the hearing, or the parties may
address any prehearing issues at the tutorial.
C. Claim Construction Hearing
The claim construction hearing generally will be scheduled for no longer than three (3)
hours on a Tuesday or Thursday afternoon. The Court, however, will specially set the hearing on
a different day and for a longer period of time if warranted. Counsel should request a telephone
conference with the Court as soon as it is apparent that a special setting is necessary.
The parties’ arguments should focus on intrinsic evidence, i.e., the patent itself and the
prosecution history. Live testimony at claim construction is disfavored; it will be allowed only
by court order upon an administrative motion explaining why the testimony would be useful.
Such a motion must be filed at least fourteen (14) days before the hearing.
Demonstrative exhibits and visual aids are permissible at the tutorial and the claim
construction hearing as long as they are based on information contained in papers previously
filed. No later than one (1) week prior to the tutorial and/or claim construction hearing, counsel
shall exchange copies of any exhibits and visual aids and shall submit to the Court bound copies
of the exhibits and visual aids.
3
VI. SUBSEQUENT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
At the time the claim construction ruling issues, the Court will also set a further case
management conference. In a joint case management statement to be filed no later than fourteen
(14) days before the conference, the parties must address the following topics:
1) whether either party wishes the Court to certify the claim construction ruling for
immediate appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit;
2) the filing of dispositive motions, and timing of those motions;
3) if willful infringement has been asserted, whether the party accused of infringement
wishes to rely on the advice-of-counsel defense. If so, the parties should be prepared
to address proposals for resolving any attorney-client privilege issues that arise, and
whether the parties believe bifurcation of the trial into liability and damages phases
would be appropriate;
4) anticipated post-claim construction discovery;
5) any other pretrial matters;
6) proposed deadlines and court dates for the remainder of the case schedule;
7) the progress of settlement discussions, if any; and
8) any changes or updates to any of the information requested in the Standing Order for
All Judges of the Northern District of California re Contents of Joint Case
Management Statement that have arisen since the filing of the parties’ previous case
management statement.
The Court will review the statement to determine whether the conference is necessary
and will enter any appropriate orders.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 28, 2025
EUMI K. LEE
United States District Judge
4
ATTACHMENT A
Model Joint Claim Construction Statement
Claim Language (Disputed Plaintiff’s Proposed Defendant’s Proposed
Terms in Bold) Construction and Evidence in Construction and Evidence in
Support Support
1. A method for counting PROPOSED PROPOSED
wild ducks, comprising the CONSTRUCTION: CONSTRUCTION:
steps of . . . (’123 Patent, birds that quack birds that swim
Claims 1 & 2)
INTRINSIC EVIDENCE: INTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
[or] ’123 Patent col. 5:8 ’123 Patent col 5:10 (“ducks
(“distinctive honking”); may be found on or near
ducks Response to Office Action, bodies of water”); Response
4/15/09, at 3 (“This patent is to Office Action, 4/15/09, at 4
Found in: ’123 Patent, distinguished from the prior (“water fowl are particularly
Claims 1, 2 ’456 Patent, art in that the quacking of the amenable to being counted by
Claims 1, 8 bird is featured.”). this method”).
DICTIONARY/TREATISE DICTIONARY/TREATISE
DEFINITIONS: Webster’s DEFINITIONS: Random
Dictionary (“duck: bird that House Dictionary (“An
quacks”); Field Guide (“bird aquatic bird”); Field Guide
call: quack”). (same).
EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE: EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE:
McDonald Dep. at 12:10 (“I’d Clark Dep. at 13:11 (“like a
say the quacking makes it a duck to water”); ’456 Patent
duck.”); ’456 Patent at col. at col. 1:38; Daffy Decl. ¶ 7.
9:4; Donald Decl. ¶ 6.
5
