I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al

Filing 930

ORDER re 923 MOTION to Compel Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Becker and for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiff's Motion for Post-Judgment Royalties filed by Google Inc., AOL Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., Target Corporation, Gannett Company, Inc. ORDERED that Plaintiff shall respond to Defendants' Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Becker and for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiffs Motion for Post-Judgment Royalties (ECF No. 923) WITHIN FIVE (5) DAYS of the entry of this Order. Defendants shall forego filing a Reply brief in support of their motion. Briefing on Plaintiffs Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment Royalties (ECF No. 822) is hereby SUSPENDED until the Court rules on Defendants' Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Becker and for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiffs Motion for Post-Judgment Royalties. The Court will provide additional instructions regarding briefing schedule of Plaintiffs Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment Royalties upon resolution of Defendants renewed motion. Signed by District Judge Raymond A. Jackson and filed on 4/17/2013. (bnew)

FILED APR 17 2013 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division . CLLRK. US. DISTRICT COURT NORFOLK. VA I/P ENGINE, INC., Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:llcv512 AOL INC., et al., Defendants. ORDER On January 23,2013, the Court granted Defendants' Motion to Postpone Briefing and Ruling on Plaintiffs Motion for Post-Judgment Royalties (ECF No. 847) in order to permit the Court to consider other post-trial motions. Having considered and ruled on several relevant posttrial motions, on April 2,2013, the Court directed the Defendants to response to Plaintiffs Motion for Post-Judgment Royalties within fifteen days of the entry of said order. Further, the Court permitted the Plaintiff to file a reply to Defendants' response within seven days, at which point, the motion would be ripe for judicial disposition. However, since the entry of the Court's April 2,2013 Order, the Defendants filed a Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Becker and For Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiffs Motion for Post-Judgment Royalties (ECF No. 923). The Defendants have also requested expedited consideration of their renewed motion, consideration which the Plaintiff opposes. Having reviewed the pleadings, it is ORDERED that: • Plaintiff shall respond to Defendants' Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Becker and for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiffs Motion for Post-Judgment Royalties (ECF No. 923) WITHIN FIVE (5) DAYS of the entry of this Order. Defendants shall forego filing a Reply brief in support of their motion. • Briefing on Plaintiffs Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment Royalties (ECF No. 822) is hereby SUSPENDED until the Court rules on Defendants' Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Becker and for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiffs Motion for Post-Judgment Royalties. The Court will provide additional instructions regarding briefing schedule of Plaintiffs Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment Royalties upon resolution of Defendants renewed motion. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Order to counsel and parties of record. IT IS SO ORDERED. Norfolk, Virginia April //.2013 Raymond A. Jackson United States District Judge