Court Rules
Judge

Judge Martha M. Pacold

Individual Rules, Standing Orders & Policies

Northern District of Illinois

Limits & Logistics

Document Limits

Opening Claim Construction Brief
25 pgs
Responsive Claim Construction Brief
25 pgs
Reply Claim Construction Brief
15 pgs
Filters:AllMandatoryMemorandaEvidence/WitnessesConferences

Page & Word Limits3 rules

Page LimitsCivil cases

Checked against the court's document on Oct 4, 2026Mandatory

The Opening Claim Construction Brief is limited to 25 pages unless the court grants prior leave.

Within thirty-five (35) days after the exchange of terms set forth in LPR 4.1, the parties opposing infringement shall file their Opening Claim Construction Brief, which may not exceed twenty-five (25) pages absent prior leave of court.

Opening Claim Construction Brief

25 pages

local patent rules · p. 9
|SecLPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs
Page LimitsCivil cases

Checked against the court's document on Oct 4, 2026Mandatory

The Responsive Claim Construction Brief is limited to 25 pages unless the court grants prior leave.

Within twenty-eight (28) days after filing of the Opening Claim Construction brief, the parties claiming infringement shall file their Responsive Claim Construction Brief, which may not exceed twenty-five (25) pages absent prior leave of Court.

Responsive Claim Construction Brief

25 pages

local patent rules · p. 10
|SecLPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs
Page LimitsCivil cases

Checked against the court's document on Oct 4, 2026Mandatory

The Reply Claim Construction Brief is limited to 15 pages unless the court grants prior leave.

Within fourteen (14) days after filing of the Responsive Claim Construction Brief, the parties opposing infringement shall file their Reply Claim Construction Brief, which may not exceed fifteen (15) pages absent prior leave of Court.

Reply Claim Construction Brief

15 pages

local patent rules · p. 10
|SecLPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs

Document Filing Requirements12 rules

Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Checked against the court's document on Oct 4, 2026Mandatory

A completed proposed scheduling order must be presented within seven days after the Rule 26(f) conference, unless the Court directs another time.

A completed proposed version of the scheduling order is to be presented to the Court within seven (7) days after the Rule 26(f) conference or at such other time as the Court directs.

Document Type

Proposed Scheduling Order

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 3
|SecLPR 1.2 Initial Scheduling Conference
Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Checked against the court's document on Oct 4, 2026Mandatory

Initial Infringement Contentions must include the specified claim, accused-instrumentality, claim-element chart, and infringement-theory information.

A party claiming patent infringement must serve on all parties “Initial Infringement Contentions” containing the following information within fourteen (14) days after the Initial Disclosure under LPR 2.1: (a) identification each claim of each patent in suit that is allegedly infringed by the opposing party, including for each claim the applicable statutory subsection of 35 U.S.C. § 271; (b) separately for each asserted claim, identification of each accused apparatus, product, device, process, method, act, or other instrumentality (“Accused Instrumentality”) of the opposing party of which the party claiming infringement is aware. Each Accused Instrumentality must be identified by name, if known, or by any product, device, or apparatus which, when used, allegedly results in the practice of the claimed method or process; (c) a chart identifying specifically where each element of each asserted claim is found within each Accused Instrumentality, including for each element that such party contends is governed by 35 U.S.C. § 112(6), a description of the claimed function of that element and the identity of the structure(s), act(s), or material(s) in the Accused Instrumentality that performs the claimed function; (d) identification of whether each element of each asserted claim is claimed to be present in the Accused Instrumentality literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. For any claim under the doctrine of equivalents, the Initial Infringement Contentions must include an explanation of each function, way, and result that is equivalent and why any differences are not substantial;

Document Type

Initial Infringement Contentions

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 5
|SecLPR 2.2 Initial Infringement Contentions
Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Checked against the court's document on Oct 4, 2026Mandatory

Initial Infringement Contentions must include the specified information about indirect infringement, priority, willfulness, and qualifying party or licensee products.

(e) for each claim that is alleged to have been indirectly infringed, an identification of any direct infringement and a description of the acts of the alleged indirect infringer that contribute to or are inducing that direct infringement. If alleged direct infringement is based on joint acts of multiple parties, the role of each such party in the direct infringement must be described; (f) for any patent that claims priority to an earlier application, the priority date to which each asserted claim allegedly is entitled; (g) identification of the basis for any allegation of willful infringement; and (h) if a party claiming patent infringement wishes to preserve the right to rely, for any purpose, on the assertion that its own or its licensee's apparatus, product, device, process, method, act, or other instrumentality practices the claimed invention, the party must identify, separately for each asserted patent, each such apparatus, product, device, process, method, act, or other instrumentality that incorporates or reflects that particular claim, including whether it is marked with the patent number.

Document Type

Initial Infringement Contentions

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 6
|SecLPR 2.2 Initial Infringement Contentions
Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Checked against the court's document on Oct 4, 2026Mandatory

Initial Non-Infringement Contentions require a responsive claim-element chart, and Initial Invalidity Contentions require detailed prior-art identification, invalidity positions, combinations and reasons, and a claim-element chart.

(a) Non-Infringement Contentions shall contain a chart, responsive to the chart required by LPR 2.2(c), that identifies as to each identified element in each asserted claim, to the extent then known by the party opposing infringement, whether such element is present literally or under the doctrine of equivalents in each Accused Instrumentality and, if not, the reason for such denial and the relevant distinctions. (b) Invalidity Contentions must contain the following information to the extent then known to the party asserting invalidity: (1) identification, with particularity, of each item of prior art that allegedly anticipates each asserted claim or renders it obvious. Each prior art patent shall be identified by its number, country of origin, and date of issue. Each prior art publication must be identified by its title, date of publication, and where feasible, author and publisher. Prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) shall be identified by specifying the item offered for sale or publicly used or known, the date the offer or use took place or the information became known, and the identity of the person or entity which made the use or which made and received the offer, or the person or entity which made the information known or to whom it was made known. Prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f) shall be identified by providing the name of the person(s) from whom and the circumstances under which the invention or any part of it was derived. Prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(g) shall be identified by providing the identities of the person(s) or entities involved in and the circumstances surrounding the making of the invention before the patent applicant(s); (2) a statement of whether each item of prior art allegedly anticipates each asserted claim or renders it obvious. If a combination of items of prior art allegedly makes a claim obvious, each such combination, and the reasons to combine such items must be identified; (3) a chart identifying where specifically in each alleged item of prior art each element of each asserted claim is found, including for each element that such party contends is governed by 35 U.S.C. § 112(6), a description of the claimed function of that element and

Document Type

Initial Non Infringement Unenforceability And Invalidity Contentions

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 6
|SecLPR 2.3 Initial Non-Infringement, Unenforceability and Invalidity Contentions
Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Checked against the court's document on Oct 4, 2026Mandatory

The parties must file a Joint Appendix with the opening brief, include the disputed patents and each patent’s prosecution history, paginate the prosecution history, and cite the appendix when referencing its materials.

On the date for filing the Opening Claim Construction Brief, the parties shall file a Joint Appendix containing the patent(s) in dispute and the prosecution history for each patent. The prosecution history must be paginated, and all parties must cite to the Joint Appendix when referencing the materials it contains.

Document Type

Joint Appendix

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 9
|SecLPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs
Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Checked against the court's document on Oct 4, 2026Mandatory

A party relying on witness testimony must include the witness’s sworn declaration with its brief and promptly make the witness available for deposition.

If a party offers the testimony of a witness to support its claim construction, it must include with its brief a sworn declaration by the witness setting forth the substance of the witness' proposed testimony, and promptly make the witness available for deposition concerning the proposed testimony.

Document Type

Claim Construction Brief

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 9
|SecLPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs
Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Checked against the court's document on Oct 4, 2026Mandatory

Within seven days after the reply brief, the parties must file a joint chart of addressed terms and proposed constructions and a joint status report proposing the hearing’s nature and form.

With seven (7) days after filing of the Reply Claim Construction Brief, the parties shall file (1) a joint claim construction chart that sets forth each claim term and phrase addressed in the claim construction briefs; each party's proposed construction, and (2) a joint status report containing the parties' proposals for the nature and form of the claim construction hearing pursuant to LPR 4.3.

Document Type

Joint Claim Construction Chart And Status Report

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 10
|SecLPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs
Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Checked against the court's document on Oct 4, 2026Mandatory

A party relying on witness testimony must include the witness’s sworn declaration with its brief and promptly make the witness available for deposition; doing so extends the reply-brief filing date by seven calendar days.

If a party offers the testimony of a witness to support its claim construction, it must include with its brief a sworn declaration by the witness setting forth the substance of the witness's proposed testimony and promptly make the witness available for deposition concerning the proposed testimony, in which case the date for the filing of a Reply Claim Construction brief shall be extended by seven (7) calendar days.

Document Type

Responsive Claim Construction Brief

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 10
|SecLPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs
Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Not confirmed. Read the court's wording below.Mandatory?

All disclosures made pursuant to LPR 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 3.1, and 3.2 must be dated and signed by counsel of record (or by the party if unrepresented by counsel) and are subject to the requirements of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 11 and 26(g).

Summary: Disclosures under the specified LPR provisions must be dated and signed by counsel of record or, if unrepresented, by the party.

Document Type

Disclosures

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 3
|SecLPR 1.5 Certification of Disclosures
Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Not confirmed. Read the court's wording below.Mandatory?

The brief shall identify any intrinsic evidence with citation to the Joint Appendix under LPR 4.2(b) and shall separately identify any extrinsic evidence the party contends supports its proposed claim construction.

Summary: The Opening Claim Construction Brief must cite supporting intrinsic evidence to the Joint Appendix and separately identify supporting extrinsic evidence.

Document Type

Opening Claim Construction Brief

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 9
|SecLPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs
Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Not confirmed. Read the court's wording below.Mandatory?

The brief shall describe all objections to any extrinsic evidence identified in the Opening Claim Construction Brief.

Summary: The Reply Claim Construction Brief must describe all objections to extrinsic evidence identified in the opening brief.

Document Type

Reply Claim Construction Brief

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 10
|SecLPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs
Filing RequirementsCivil cases

Not confirmed. Read the court's wording below.Mandatory?

The brief shall also describe all objections to any extrinsic evidence identified in the Opening Claim Construction Brief.

Summary: The Responsive Claim Construction Brief must describe all objections to extrinsic evidence identified in the opening brief.

Document Type

Responsive Claim Construction Brief

Specific requirements detailed in rule text.
local patent rules · p. 10
|SecLPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs

Filing & Service rules

Filing Timing and Cure Windows

All dispositive motions must be filed within 28 days after the scheduled end of expert discovery; a party may move for summary judgment earlier if circumstances warrant, subject to the trial judge's decision whether to consider it.

All dispositive motions shall be filed within twenty-eight (28) days after the scheduled date for the end of expert discovery.

Not confirmed. Read the court's wording below. · Civil cases

Page 11 | LPR 6.1 Final Day for Filing Dispositive Motions

Expert witness depositions must be completed within 35 days after exchange of expert rebuttal disclosures.

Depositions of expert witnesses shall be completed within thirty-five (35) days after exchange of expert rebuttal disclosures.

Not confirmed. Read the court's wording below. · Civil cases

Page 11 | LPR 5.2 Depositions of Experts

Each party must make its initial expert disclosures on issues for which it bears the burden of proof within 21 days after discovery closes following the claim construction ruling, unless the Court orders otherwise.

within twenty-one (21) days after the close of discovery after the claim construction ruling, each party shall make its initial expert witness disclosures required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 on issues for which it bears the burden of proof;

Not confirmed. Read the court's wording below. · Civil cases

Page 11 | LPR 5.1 Disclosure of Experts and Expert Reports

Each party must make rebuttal expert disclosures on issues for which the opposing party bears the burden of proof within 35 days after the date for initial expert reports, unless the Court orders otherwise.

within thirty-five (35) days after the date for initial expert reports, each party shall make its rebuttal expert witness disclosures required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 on the issues for which the opposing party bears the burden of proof.

Not confirmed. Read the court's wording below. · Civil cases

Page 11 | LPR 5.1 Disclosure of Experts and Expert Reports

Service and Proof of Service Rules

A party claiming patent infringement must serve its Initial Infringement Contentions on all parties within 14 days after the LPR 2.1 Initial Disclosure.

A party claiming patent infringement must serve on all parties “Initial Infringement Contentions” containing the following information within fourteen (14) days after the Initial Disclosure under LPR 2.1:

Checked and corrected to match the court's document on Oct 4, 2026 · Civil cases

Page 5 | LPR 2.2 Initial Infringement Contentions

A party opposing infringement or asserting invalidity or unenforceability must serve its Initial Contentions on all parties within 14 days after service of the Initial Infringement Contentions.

Each party opposing a claim of patent infringement or asserting invalidity or unenforceability shall serve upon all parties its "Initial Non-Infringement, Unenforceability and Invalidity Contentions" within fourteen (14) days after service of the Initial Infringement Contentions.

Checked and corrected to match the court's document on Oct 4, 2026 · Civil cases

Page 6 | LPR 2.3 Initial Non-Infringement, Unenforceability and Invalidity Contentions

A party asserting non-infringement must serve Final Non-infringement Contentions on all other parties within 28 days after service of the Final Infringement Contentions.

Each party asserting non-infringement of a patent claim shall serve on all other parties “Final Non-infringement Contentions” within twenty-eight (28) days after service of the Final Infringement Contentions, containing the information called for in LPR 2.3(a).

Checked and corrected to match the court's document on Oct 4, 2026 · Civil cases

Page 7 | LPR 3.2 Final Non-infringement, Enforceability and Validity Contentions

A party claiming patent infringement must serve its Initial Response to Invalidity Contentions on all parties within 14 days after service of the initial contentions.

Within fourteen (14) days after service of the Initial Non-Infringement and Invalidity Contentions under LPR 2.3, each party claiming patent infringement shall serve upon all parties its “Initial Response to Invalidity Contentions.”

Checked and corrected to match the court's document on Oct 4, 2026 · Civil cases

Page 7 | LPR 2.5 Initial Response to Invalidity Contentions

A party claiming patent infringement must serve Final Infringement Contentions on all parties within 21 weeks after the due date for service of Initial Infringement Contentions.

A party claiming patent infringement must serve on all parties “Final Infringement Contentions” containing the information required by LPR 2.2 (a)–(h) within twenty-one (21) weeks after the due date for service of Initial Infringement Contentions.

Not confirmed. Read the court's wording below. · Civil cases

Page 7 | LPR 3.1 Final Infringement, Unenforceability and Invalidity Contentions

A party asserting invalidity or unenforceability must serve Final Unenforceability and Invalidity Contentions on all other parties at the same time as the Final Infringement Contentions.

Each party asserting invalidity or unenforceability of a patent claim shall serve on all other parties, at the same time that the Final Infringement Contentions are served, “Final Unenforceability and Invalidity Contentions” containing the information required by LPR 2.3 (b), (c) at the same time.

Not confirmed. Read the court's wording below. · Civil cases

Page 7 | LPR 3.1 Final Infringement, Unenforceability and Invalidity Contentions

A party asserting patent infringement must serve Final Contentions in Response at the same time as the Final Non-Infringement Contentions are served.

Each party asserting ===== PAGE 8 ===== patent infringement shall serve, at the same time the “Final Non-Infringement Contentions” are served, Final Contentions in Response to any “Final Unenforceability and Invalidity Contentions.”

Not confirmed. Read the court's wording below. · Civil cases

Page 8 | LPR 3.2 Final Non-infringement, Enforceability and Validity Contentions

About United States District Judge Martha M. Pacold

**District Judge Martha M. Pacold** was appointed to the Northern District of Illinois by President Donald J. Trump in 2019. She is the first Asian-American woman to serve as a district judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Judge Pacold was born on February 3, 1979, and attended St. Ignatius College Prep in Chicago. After law school, she clerked for Judge A. Raymond Randolph of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit from 2002 to 2003, then for Judge Jay Bybee of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from 2003 to 2004, and then for Associate Justice Clarence Thomas of the U.S. Supreme Court from 2004 to 2005. She served as Deputy General Counsel of the U.S. Department of the Treasury from 2017 to 2019. **Education** - University of Chicago Law School, J.D., with honors, Order of the Coif, Editor-in-Chief of the Law Review, 2002 - Indiana University, B.A., with highest distinction, Phi Beta Kappa **Career** - Deputy General Counsel, U.S. Department of the Treasury (2017–2019) - Law Clerk, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, U.S. Supreme Court (2004–2005) - Law Clerk, Hon. Jay Bybee, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit (2003–2004) - Law Clerk, Hon. A. Raymond Randolph, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit (2002–2003)

**Courthouse:** Everett McKinley Dirksen U.S. Courthouse, 219 S. Dearborn Street, Chicago, IL 60604 **Chambers:** Room 2356 **Phone:** (312) 435-3032 **Fax:** (312) 777-3860 **Chambers Staff** - Courtroom Deputy: Lauren Knight, (312) 435-5814, Room 2332A - Court Reporter: Kathleen Fennell, (312) 435-5569, Room 2328A

Common questions about Judge Martha M. Pacold's rules

What page or word limits apply to opening claim construction brief before Judge Martha M. Pacold?

Judge Martha M. Pacold's rule states these limits: 25 pages. The Opening Claim Construction Brief is limited to 25 pages unless the court grants prior leave.

View ruleSource: page 9, section LPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs

What page or word limits apply to responsive claim construction brief before Judge Martha M. Pacold?

Judge Martha M. Pacold's rule states these limits: 25 pages. The Responsive Claim Construction Brief is limited to 25 pages unless the court grants prior leave.

View ruleSource: page 10, section LPR 4.2 Claim Construction Briefs

What must be included with proposed scheduling order filings before Judge Martha M. Pacold?

The rule identifies required filing content or certificates. A completed proposed scheduling order must be presented within seven days after the Rule 26(f) conference, unless the Court directs another time.

View ruleSource: page 3, section LPR 1.2 Initial Scheduling Conference

What must be included with disclosures filings before Judge Martha M. Pacold?

The rule identifies required filing content or certificates. Disclosures under the specified LPR provisions must be dated and signed by counsel of record or, if unrepresented, by the party.

View ruleSource: page 3, section LPR 1.5 Certification of Disclosures

What filing deadlines does Judge Martha M. Pacold set?

Each party must make its initial expert disclosures on issues for which it bears the burden of proof within 21 days after discovery closes following the claim construction ruling, unless the Court orders otherwise.

View ruleSource: page 11, section LPR 5.1 Disclosure of Experts and Expert Reports

What rule applies to serving all parties before Judge Martha M. Pacold?

The rule addresses service method, recipient, or timing requirements. Details: recipient: all parties, timing: 14 calendar days after service. A party claiming patent infringement must serve its Initial Infringement Contentions on all parties within 14 days after the LPR 2.1 Initial Disclosure.

View ruleSource: page 5, section LPR 2.2 Initial Infringement Contentions
Complete rules summary for Judge Martha M. Pacold

A completed proposed scheduling order must be presented within seven days after the Rule 26(f) conference, unless the Court directs another time.

Disclosures under the specified LPR provisions must be dated and signed by counsel of record or, if unrepresented, by the party.

A party claiming patent infringement must serve its Initial Infringement Contentions on all parties within 14 days after the LPR 2.1 Initial Disclosure.

A party relying on witness testimony must include the witness’s sworn declaration with its brief and promptly make the witness available for deposition.

Initial Infringement Contentions must include the specified claim, accused-instrumentality, claim-element chart, and infringement-theory information.

Initial Infringement Contentions must include the specified information about indirect infringement, priority, willfulness, and qualifying party or licensee products.

A party opposing infringement or asserting invalidity or unenforceability must serve its Initial Contentions on all parties within 14 days after service of the Initial Infringement Contentions.

Initial Non-Infringement Contentions require a responsive claim-element chart, and Initial Invalidity Contentions require detailed prior-art identification, invalidity positions, combinations and reasons, and a claim-element chart.

A party claiming patent infringement must serve its Initial Response to Invalidity Contentions on all parties within 14 days after service of the initial contentions.

A party claiming patent infringement must serve Final Infringement Contentions on all parties within 21 weeks after the due date for service of Initial Infringement Contentions.

A party asserting invalidity or unenforceability must serve Final Unenforceability and Invalidity Contentions on all other parties at the same time as the Final Infringement Contentions.

A party asserting non-infringement must serve Final Non-infringement Contentions on all other parties within 28 days after service of the Final Infringement Contentions.

A party asserting patent infringement must serve Final Contentions in Response at the same time as the Final Non-Infringement Contentions are served.

The Opening Claim Construction Brief is limited to 25 pages unless the court grants prior leave.

The Opening Claim Construction Brief must cite supporting intrinsic evidence to the Joint Appendix and separately identify supporting extrinsic evidence.

The parties must file a Joint Appendix with the opening brief, include the disputed patents and each patent’s prosecution history, paginate the prosecution history, and cite the appendix when referencing its materials.

The Responsive Claim Construction Brief is limited to 25 pages unless the court grants prior leave.

A party relying on witness testimony must include the witness’s sworn declaration with its brief and promptly make the witness available for deposition; doing so extends the reply-brief filing date by seven calendar days.

The Responsive Claim Construction Brief must describe all objections to extrinsic evidence identified in the opening brief.

The Reply Claim Construction Brief is limited to 15 pages unless the court grants prior leave.

The Reply Claim Construction Brief must describe all objections to extrinsic evidence identified in the opening brief.

Within seven days after the reply brief, the parties must file a joint chart of addressed terms and proposed constructions and a joint status report proposing the hearing’s nature and form.

Each party must make its initial expert disclosures on issues for which it bears the burden of proof within 21 days after discovery closes following the claim construction ruling, unless the Court orders otherwise.

Each party must make rebuttal expert disclosures on issues for which the opposing party bears the burden of proof within 35 days after the date for initial expert reports, unless the Court orders otherwise.

Expert witness depositions must be completed within 35 days after exchange of expert rebuttal disclosures.

All dispositive motions must be filed within 28 days after the scheduled end of expert discovery; a party may move for summary judgment earlier if circumstances warrant, subject to the trial judge's decision whether to consider it.

More Judges in Northern District of Illinois

Albert Berry III
Magistrate Judge
Andrea R. Wood
Judge
Beth W. Jantz
Magistrate Judge
Charles P. Kocoras
Judge
Daniel P. McLaughlin
Magistrate Judge
Edmond E. Chang
Judge
Elaine E. Bucklo
Judge
Franklin U. Valderrama
Judge