Modavox, Inc. v. Yahoo! Inc.

Filing 262

ORDER by Judge Joseph C. Spero granting 240 Motion to Amend/Correct; Augme is required to E-FILE the amended document; granting 245 Motion to Amend/Correct; Yahoo! is required to E-FILE the amended document (jcslc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/5/2012)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

AUGME TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

7

Plaintiff,

8

v.

9

YAHOO!, INC.,
Defendant.
___________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING AUGME’S
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS, AND
GRANTING YAHOO!’S CROSSMOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS [Docket
Nos. 240 and 245]

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Case No. C09-05386 JCS

12
13
14
15
16

On March 12, 2012, Plaintiff Augme Technologies, Inc. (“Augme”), filed a Motion for

17

Leave to Amend Infringement Contentions (“Motion”). See Dkt. No. 240. Specifically, Augme

18

moves for leave to amend its Patent L.R. 3-1 Infringement Contentions “to incorporate additional

19

information from the confidential source code, documents and deposition testimony recently

20

provided by Yahoo!, Inc..” Motion at 1. On March 22, 2012, Defendant Yahoo!, Inc. (“Yahoo!”)

21

filed an opposition to Augme’s Motion as well as a Cross-Motion for Leave to Amend Invalidity

22

Contentions (“Cross-Motion”). See Dkt. No. 245. Yahoo!’s amendments “primarily disclose

23

additional page citations within previously-identified references, and add three new references.”

24

Cross-Motion at 12. Augme opposes Yahoo!’s Cross-Motion. See Augme’s Reply in Support of its

25

Motion for Leave to Amend Infringement Contentions and in Opposition to Yahoo!’s Cross-Motion,

26

Dkt. No. 251. The Court finds that the Motion and Cross-Motion are suitable for determination

27

without oral argument, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7–1(b). Accordingly, the hearing set for April

28

13, 2012 is vacated.

1
2
3

The Court, having considered the Motion and Cross-Motion, and finding good cause
supporting both, finds that the Motion and Cross-Motion should be, and are hereby, GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5
6

Dated: April 5, 2012
_______________________________
JOSEPH C. SPERO
United States Magistrate Judge

7
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

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

2