The court granted defendants' motion to supplement their claim construction briefing with an expert declaration following the Supreme Court's decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2120 (2014). The Court noted that it expected indefiniteness arguments to be “substantial” at the upcoming Markman, because several central terms of the patents-in-suit at issue were being challenged as indefinite. The Court concluded that the Nautilus decision impacts the Markman proceedings and thus the request to present expert evidence based on the new Nautilus standard was reasonable. “In weighing the tension between preventing delay and ensuring completeness based on new law, the Court will emphasize completeness and permit the parties to respond to Nautilus with briefing and with expert submissions, if they so choose.”
Mycone Dental Supply Co., Inc. v. Creative Nail Design, Inc., et. al., 1-11-cv-04380 (NJD July 9, 2014, Order) (Simandle, J).