Synopsys, Inc. v. Atoptech, Inc

Filing 910

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NOVEMBER 16, 2016 ORDER. Defendant's motion is denied, without prejudice to defendant's filing a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration, to be presented to Magistrate Judge Ryu. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/8/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 SYNOPSYS, INC., Plaintiff, United States District Court Northern District of California 11 v. 12 13 Case No. 13-cv-02965-MMC ATOPTECH, INC, Defendant. 14 ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NOVEMBER 16, 2016 ORDER Re: Dkt. No. 904 15 Before the Court is defendant’s motion, filed December 2, 2016, for relief from a 16 17 nondispositive pretrial order of Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu, filed November 16, 18 2016. 19 Defendant’s motion is, however, based on evidence not previously submitted to 20 Magistrate Judge Ryu, specifically, an exhibit “created by [defendant’s counsel] with 21 summary information about the asserted patents in the case.” (See Marsh Dec. ¶ 12; 22 see also Mot. at 1:21-23 (“Although [defendant] believes that the November 16 order is 23 clearly erroneous . . . should the Court prefer, [defendant] respectfully requests leave to 24 file a motion for reconsideration of the November 16 before Judge Ryu.”).) As a 25 consequence, defendant’s motion is, in essence, a motion for reconsideration based on 26 newly-offered evidence. 27 28 Accordingly, defendant’s motion is hereby DENIED, without prejudice to defendant’s filing a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration, to be presented 1 to Magistrate Judge Ryu. See Civil L.R. 7-9(b)(2). 2 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 Dated: December 8, 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?