EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC v. Apple Inc.

Filing 178

ORDER REQUIRING ADDITIONAL BRIEFING re 176 Statement. By May 31, 2016, plaintiff shall file a brief not exceeding 10 pages. By June 7, 2016, defendant shall file a response not exceeding 10 pages. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 05/24/2016. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/24/2016)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

EON CORP IP HOLDINGS LLC,

Case No. 14-cv-05511-WHO

Plaintiff,
9
v.

ORDER REQUIRING ADDITIONAL
BRIEFING

10
11

APPLE INC.,

Re: Dkt. No. 176

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendant.
12
13

Currently before me is the parties’ dispute over whether Apple should be compelled to

14

produce documents from three prior cases. Dkt. No. 176. I find that additional briefing is

15

necessary to resolve the dispute.

16

By May 31, 2016, plaintiff shall file a brief not exceeding 10 pages defining the

17

appropriate “technological nexus” and showing the technological nexus between the two patents at

18

issue here and the patent claims actually litigated in the VirnetX Inc. v. Apple Inc., No. 6:12-cv-

19

00855-RWS, Unwired Planet, LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 13-cv-04134-VC, and SimpleAir, Inc. v.

20

AWS Convergence Technologies, Inc., et. al., No. 2-09-cv-00289 cases. If plaintiff contends, in

21

the alternative, that discovery is nonetheless appropriate under the traditional Rule 26(b) standard,

22

plaintiff shall identify with specificity each category of documents it believes meets that standard

23

and why. Plaintiff shall provide citations to the dockets of the three cases to support its

24

arguments.

25

By June 7, 2016, defendant shall file a response not exceeding 10 pages, defining the

26

appropriate “technological nexus” and responding to plaintiff’s arguments. To the extent Apple

27

relies on a burden argument (assuming plaintiff makes a showing of relevance under the

28

technological nexus or Rule 26(b) standards), it must show why production would be unduly

1

burdensome. I will take the matter under submission, unless I determine that oral argument is

2

necessary.

3
4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 24, 2016
______________________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge

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