ChriMar Systems Inc. et al v. Cisco Systems Inc. et al

Filing 371

ORDER CLARIFYING SUMMARY JUDGMENT PROCEDURE AND PAGE LIMITS re 370 JOINT REQUEST OF THE PARTIES FOR CLARIFICATION OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT PROCEDURE. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 4/25/16. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CHRIMAR SYSTEMS INC, et al., Plaintiffs, 8 9 10 ORDER CLARIFYING SUMMARY JUDGMENT PROCEDURE AND PAGE LIMITS v. CISCO SYSTEMS INC, et al., Re: Docket No. 370 Defendants. 11 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 13-cv-01300-JSW 12 13 14 15 The Court has received the parties’ Joint Request for Clarification of Summary Judgment Procedure, and it issues the following rulings: 1. The parties shall file four briefs total, and Plaintiffs will file the opening brief. 16 Therefore, the parties shall proceed with Option One, and they may address which party bears the 17 ultimate burden of proof on any issue in their briefs. 18 2. The parties’ understanding of the page limitations associated with the motions is 19 incorrect. Although the Court has directed the parties to proceed by way of cross-motions, when it 20 follows that procedure, it does not deviate from its general page limitations, which limits motions 21 for summary judgment to 25 pages. See Civil Standing Order ¶ 9. However, given the number of 22 issues involved, the Court will sua sponte grant the parties some additional pages to present their 23 arguments to the Court. 24 Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ opening brief shall not exceed 30 pages. Defendants’ cross- 25 motion and opposition shall not exceed 45 pages, Plaintiffs’ opposition and reply shall not exceed 26 40 pages, and Defendants’ reply shall not exceed 25 pages. In addition, the Court admonishes the 27 parties that any footnotes must be in 12 point font, and all objections to evidence must be 28 contained within the parties’ briefs. See N.D. Civ. L.Rs. 3-4(c)(2); 7-3(a), (c). 1 If the parties believ that they will require a ve w additional pa ages to prese their argu ent uments, they y 2 mu submit a request to th Court by no later than 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday April 26, 20 ust r he n n 016, which 3 pro ovides specif and detailed reasons for needing the addition pages. fic nal 4 5 6 7 IT IS SO ORDER RED. Da ated: April 25 2016 5, ___ __________ ___________ __________ ________ JEF FFREY S. W WHITE Un nited States D District Judg ge 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?