After denying defendant’s motion to increase the number of claim terms to be construed, the court granted defendant’s alternative motion to reduce the number of claims asserted by plaintiff. “No jury in this case is going to resolve 57 patent claims, and there is no legitimate reason not to begin work now on whittling that number down to something manageable. . . . [I]n the joint case management report due 30 days after the claim construction ruling, [plaintiff] shall identify the 25 claims on which it wishes to proceed. This itself may not be the final cut, but it is a reasonable start down that road. In advance of the expert reports, the court will entertain a request to further reduce the set of asserted claims.”
DCG Systems, Inc v. Checkpoint Technologies, LLC, 5-11-cv-03792 (CAND April 13, 2012, Order) (Grewal, M.J.)
The court ordered plaintiff to "reduce the number of asserted claims to twelve" and "identify which claims are asserted against each Defendant."
Realtime Data, LLC d/b/a IXO v. Metropcs Texas, LLC, et. al., 6-10-cv-00493 (TXED April 13, 2012, Order) (Love, M.J.)