Luxpro Corporation v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 52

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply and Other Relief by Apple, Inc.. (Pratt, James)

Luxpro Corporation v. Apple, Inc.

Doc. 52

Case 4:08-cv-04092-HFB Document 52

Filed 10/08/09 Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION LUXPRO CORPORATION, a Taiwanese Corporation vs. CASE NO. 4:08CV04092-HFB Defendant Plaintiff

APPLE, INC. f/k/a Apple Computer, Inc.,

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AND OTHER RELIEF Comes now the defendant, Apple, Inc. f/k/a Apple Computer, Inc., and for this, its unopposed motion for extension of time and other relief, states: 1. That the plaintiff filed its original complaint on October 14, 2008, and its

first amended complaint on October 20, 2008. 2. That the defendant filed a motion to dismiss the first amended complaint

pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on December 19, 2008. 3. That on September 28, 2009, the Court issued a memorandum opinion

granting in part and denying in part the defendant's motion to dismiss. 4. That the Court's ruling gave the plaintiff fourteen (14) days to file any

amendments to its first amended complaint regarding the commercial disparagement claim. 5. That the plaintiff has now filed a motion seeking additional time to file its

second amended complaint. In that motion, plaintiff seeks an extension up to and

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 4:08-cv-04092-HFB Document 52

Filed 10/08/09 Page 2 of 4

including November 2, 2009, to file the second amended complaint. Defendant does not oppose the motion. 6. That since the Court's ruling denied in part the defendant's motion to

dismiss, under Rule 6 and 12(a)(4)(A) of the FRCP, the defendant's answer to plaintiff's first amended complaint is now due on or before October 12, 2009. 7. That given plaintiff's announced intention to file a second amended

complaint, the defendants respectfully requests an order of this Court declaring that the defendant not be required to answer the first amended complaint, but rather file its responsive pleading following the filing of the plaintiff's second amended complaint. 8. done. 9. That counsel for the defendant has conferred with counsel for the plaintiff That this request if not for the purpose of delay, but so that justice may be

and the plaintiff does not oppose this request. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, defendant respectfully requests an order of this Court declaring that the defendant not be required to answer the first amended complaint, but rather file its responsive pleading following the filing of the plaintiff's second amended complaint, and for such further relief to which it may be entitled.

Case 4:08-cv-04092-HFB Document 52

Filed 10/08/09 Page 3 of 4

Respectfully submitted, /s/ James M. Pratt, Jr. JAMES M. PRATT, JR. Arkansas Bar No: 74124 144 Washington Street, Northwest P.O. Box 938 Camden, Arkansas 71701 Telephone: [phone] Email: [e-mail] and KEVIN A. CRASS Arkansas Bar No: 84029 Friday, Eldredge & Clark, LLP 400 West Capitol Avenue Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3522 Telephone: [phone] Email: [e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendant, Apple, Inc.

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE Counsel for defendant has conferred with counsel for plaintiff in order to determine whether the relief requested in this motion of opposed. Counsel for the defendant has been advised that plaintiff does not oppose the relief requested. /s/ James M. Pratt, Jr. James M. Pratt, Jr.

Case 4:08-cv-04092-HFB Document 52

Filed 10/08/09 Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system, this 8th day of October, 2009. /s/James M. Pratt, Jr. James M. Pratt, Jr.