Overture Services, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 95

MOTION MOTION PLAINTIFF'S MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST FOR GUIDANCE REGARDING EXISTENCE OF LIMITATIONS ON THE LENGTH OF PLAINTIFF'S REPLY BRIEF REGARDING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION filed by Overture Services, Inc.. (Fenwick, Anthony) filed by Overture Services, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Fenwick, Anthony)

Overture Services, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Doc. 95 Att. 1

Case 3:02-cv-01991-JSW

Document 95-2

Filed 08/25/2003

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Latham & Watkins
ATTORNEYS AT LAW SILICON VALLEY

LATHAM & WATKINS Anthony I. Fenwick (Bar No. 158667) Allon Stabinsky (Bar No. 197642) 135 Commonwealth Drive Menlo Park, California 94025 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE Jack C. Berenzweig (Pro Hac) William H. Frankel (Pro Hac) Jason C. White (Pro Hac) Charles M. Mcmahon (Pro Hac) NBC Tower - Suite 3600 455 North Cityfront Plaza Drive Chicago, Illinois 60611 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff OVERTURE SERVICES, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

OVERTURE SERVICES, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE INC., a California Corporation, Defendant.

CASE NO. C02-01991 JSW (EDL) [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR GUIDANCE REGARDING EXISTENCE OF LIMITATIONS ON THE LENGTH OF PLAINTIFF'S REPLY BRIEF REGARDING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION

Pursuant to Local Rule 7-10(b), and in response to the unauthorized filing of a 46 page responsive claim construction brief by defendant Google Technologies Inc. ("Google"), Plaintiff Overture Services, Inc. ("Overture") filed a miscellaneous administrative request seeking the Court's guidance regarding the existence of any limitations on the length of Overture's reply brief regarding claim construction. Having fully considered that request and any response thereto filed by defendant, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1
Dockets.Justia.com

Case 3:02-cv-01991-JSW

Document 95-2

Filed 08/25/2003

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Latham & Watkins
ATTORNEYS AT LAW SILICON VALLEY

_________ Plaintiff Overture may file a reply brief regarding claim construction that exceeds 15 pages in length. or __________ Defendant Google's oversized Responsive Claim Construction Brief filed Friday August 22, 2003, is stricken. Defendant Google shall file a responsive claim construction brief of not more than 25 pages on or before _________________, 2003. Plaintiff Overture's reply brief shall be due 7 court days after the filing of Google's brief and shall be not more than 15 pages in length. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _________________

The Honorable Jeffrey S. White United States District Court Judge

2