Activevideo Networks, Inc v. Trans Video Electronics, Ltd
Filing
26
ORDER re 8 Supplemental Evidence. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 8/12/2013. (emclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/12/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
ACTIVEVIDEO NETWORKS, INC.,
9
Plaintiff,
v.
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
ORDER RE SUPPLEMENTAL
EVIDENCE
TRANS VIDEO ELECTRONICS, LTD.,
12
No. C-13-1980 EMC
Defendant.
___________________________________/
(Docket No. 8)
13
14
15
The Court has reviewed the sur-reply filed by Plaintiff ActiveVideo Networks, Inc. (“AV”),
16
in which it argues, inter alia, that the covenant not to sue proposed by Trans Video Electronics, Ltd.
17
is inadequate. AV asserts, for instance, that the covenant is deficient because it covers only AV and
18
not any of its customers. The Court hereby orders AV to provide evidence as to whether it has
19
indemnity agreements with its customers. See, e.g., Microchip Technology Inc. v. Chamberlain
20
Group, 441 F.3d 936 (Fed. Cir. 2006); Visto Corp. v. Sproqit Techs., Inc., No. C-04-0651 EMC,
21
2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96173 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2006).
22
The supplemental evidence shall be filed by August 15, 2013.
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
24
25
Dated: August 12, 2013
26
27
28
_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?