Synopsys, Inc. v. Atoptech, Inc

Filing 861

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Plaintiff's motion is denied, without prejudice to plaintiff's filing a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration, to be presented to Magistrate Judge Ryu. Plaintiff's administrative motion to file exhibits under seal is denied as moot. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on 10/05/16. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/5/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 SYNOPSYS, INC., Plaintiff, 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 Case No. 13-cv-02965-MMC v. ATOPTECH, INC, Defendant. ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE Re: Dkt. No. 852 14 15 Before the Court is plaintiff’s Motion for Relief from Nondispositive Pretrial Order of 16 Magistrate Judge, filed September 30, 2016, by which plaintiff objects to Magistrate 17 Judge Donna M. Ryu’s order of September 16, 2016, denying plaintiff’s motion for leave 18 to amend its infringement contentions. 19 Plaintiff’s motion for relief is based on evidence not previously submitted to 20 Magistrate Judge Ryu, specifically, (1) a declaration of Dr. Matthew Guthaus, dated 21 September 30, 2016, and (2) an exhibit “providing further detail to” an exhibit previously 22 filed by defendant in support of its opposition to plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend 23 infringement contentions. As a consequence, plaintiff’s motion for relief is, in essence, a 24 motion for reconsideration based on newly-offered evidence. 25 Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for leave is hereby DENIED, without prejudice to 26 plaintiff’s filing a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration, to be presented to 27 Magistrate Judge Ryu. See Civil L.R. 7-9(b)(2). 28 In light of the above, plaintiff’s administrative motion to file exhibits to its motion for 1 relief under seal is hereby DENIED as moot. 2 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 Dated: October 5, 2016 MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?