Ultra Products, Inc. v. Antec, Inc. et al

Filing 376

ORDER RE: 375 PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 3/30/11.(rslc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/30/2011)

Streak Products Inc v. Antec, Inc. et al

Doc. 376

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

*E-Filed 3/30/11*

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION STREAK PRODUCTS, INC., Plaintiff, v. ANTEC, INC., et al., Defendants. ____________________________________/ On March 28, 2011, this Court deemed all defense "documents not cited to, or identified and relied upon in defendant's briefs" inadmissible on the grounds of relevance. Accordingly, plaintiff's administrative request to file two appendices was rendered moot and those appendices were struck from the record. Plaintiff then filed a request for clarification as to whether that Order also struck a declaration (the "Joyal declaration") that accompanied the appendices. In that request, plaintiff explained the declaration's importance to its opposition motion and asked that the Court clarify-- and it does so now--that the prior Order did not strike the declaration. No. C 09-4255 RS ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

NO. C 09-4255 RS ORDER

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Dated: 3/30/11 RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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
NO. C 09-4255 RS ORDER

2