Vigilos, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al

Filing 133

ORDER REGARDING FEBRUARY 3 SUBMISSION re 132 Opposition/Response to Motion filed by Vigilos, LLC, 129 Order. Signed by Judge Alsup on February 6, 2012. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2012)

1
2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3
4

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
6
7

No. C 11-06240 WHA
VIGILOS, LLC,
No. C 11-04117 SBA

8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER REGARDING
FEBRUARY 3 SUBMISSION

FORA CARE, INC.,
Defendant.
/

12
13

Only plaintiff Vigilos, LLC responded to the January 31 order requesting additional

14

information regarding the motion to relate. Plaintiff’s response was inadequate. By NOON ON

15

FEBRUARY 8, plaintiff shall please submit a more detailed disclosure stating exactly which patent

16

claims are being asserted against each defendant and whether there are discrepancies. Plaintiff

17

shall also submit a more detailed description of the allegedly infringing products and defendants’

18

relationship with each other regarding the products.

19

The January 31 order requested “the parties” to explain the nature of the allegedly

20

infringing products. Defendants in both the Sling Media action (Case No. 4:11-cv-04117-SBA)

21

and the above-captioned action failed to respond to the January 31 order. By NOON ON

22

FEBRUARY 8, defendants shall submit a description of the allegedly infringing products and

23

defendants’ relationship with each other regarding the products.

24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26
27
28

Dated: February 6, 2012.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE