Cypress Semiconductor Corporation v. GSI Technology, Inc.
Filing
63
ORDER VACATING MOTION HEARING re 56 MOTION for Leave to File Notice of Motion and Motion for Leave to File First Amended Answers and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff Cypress Semiconductor Corporation's Complaints for Patent Infringement in Consolidated Cases; filed by GSI Technology, Inc. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on January 31, 2014. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/31/2014)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR
CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
8
9
10
ORDER VACATING MOTION
HEARING
v.
GSI TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
Re: ECF No. 56
Defendant.
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Case No. 13-cv-02013-JST
12
13
Before the Court is Defendant GSI Technology, Inc.'s Motion for Leave to File First
14
Amended Answers and Affirmative Defenses. ECF No. 56. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
15
Procedure 78(b) and Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds that the parties’ briefs have
16
thoroughly addressed the issues, rendering the matter suitable for disposition without oral
17
argument. The hearing on this matter, currently scheduled for February 6, 2014, is hereby
18
VACATED.
19
However, if any party advises the Court in writing by no later than two days from the date
20
of this Order that most or all of the argument for its side will be conducted by a lawyer who has
21
been licensed to practice law for four or fewer years, and who has not previously presented
22
argument before this Court, then the Court will reschedule the hearing at a time that is convenient
23
to all parties in order to provide that opportunity. Any such notice should reflect the date or dates
24
on which the parties are available for the hearing.
25
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 31, 2014
______________________________________
JON S. TIGAR
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?