Netflix, Inc. v. Blockbuster, Inc.

Filing 201

Netflix, Inc. v. Blockbuster, Inc.

Doc. 201

Case 3:06-cv-02361-WHA

Document 201

Filed 05/01/2007

Page 1 of 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NETFLIX, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, v. BLOCKBUSTER, INC., a Delaware corporation, and DOES 1­50, Defendants. AND RELATED COUNTER ACTION. / / No. C 06-02361 WHA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

REQUEST FOR INPUT ON PAGE LIMITS

With respect to summary judgment motions, counsel are reminded that "less is more." Fewer motions are more likely to allow the Court to grasp the main points. More motions are more likely to submerge the best points beneath the storm-tossed sea of controversy. For all summary judgment motions combined, the Court proposes that each side be limited in its opening memoranda to 30 pages of briefing and 100 pages of evidentiary support (with equivalent limits on the oppositions) and 15 pages in reply with no further evidentiary support without leave of the Court. Please respond by MAY 7, 2007, AT NOON, concerning this proposal. Whether an advisory jury will be used in connection with the inequitable conduct issue will be postponed to the final pretrial conference. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 1, 2007.

WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dockets.Justia.com