Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. v. Akanoc Solutions, Inc. et al

Filing 266

MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages filed by Akanoc Solutions, Inc., Steven Chen, Managed Solutions Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Lowe, James) (Filed on 1/18/2010) Modified on 1/19/2010 (cv, COURT STAFF).

Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. v. Akanoc Solutions, Inc. et al

Doc. 266

Case5:07-cv-03952-JW Document266

Filed01/18/10 Page1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

GAUNTLETT & ASSOCIATES David A. Gauntlett (SBN 96399) James A. Lowe (SBN 214383) Preston K. Ascherin (SBN 260361) 18400 Von Karman, Suite 300 Irvine, California 92612 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Akanoc Solutions, Inc., Managed Solutions Group, Inc. and Steve Chen

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION

LOUIS VUITTON MALLETIER, S.A., Plaintiff, vs. AKANOC SOLUTIONS, INC., et al., Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No.: C 07-3952 JW (HRL) Hon. James Ware DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT FOR RULE 59 MOTION

166982.1-10562-002-1/18/2010

DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ADMIN. RELIEF TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT ­ C 07-3952 JW (HRL)

Dockets.Justia.com

Case5:07-cv-03952-JW Document266

Filed01/18/10 Page2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-11,1 Defendants Managed Solutions Group, Inc., Akanoc Solutions, Inc. and Steve Chen ("Defendants") respectfully submit this motion for administrative relief for an order granting leave to exceed the 25-page limit (Northern District Civil Local Rule 7-4(b)) for their Rule 59 Motion. Although Defendants have attempted to address the myriad legal and factual issues that must be presented in their Rule 59 Motion within 25 pages, Defendants have been unable. These issues include: (1) insufficiencies in the evidence as to direct infringement; (2) insufficiencies in the evidence as to contributory infringement; (3) insufficiencies in the jury instructions; (4) the unconstitutionality of the statutory damages provisions as applied in this case; and (5) the grossly excessive statutory damages award in this case. Each issue requires multi-step analysis. This case also involves both copyright and trademark claims ­ based on different statutes ­ necessitating parallel, but separate analysis which Defendants could not adequately present in 25 pages. Defendants will be prejudiced if this request is denied because they will have to truncate or omit issues. But no issue is indispensable. Defendants' analysis of each issue demonstrates why this Court must vacate the verdict and award in this case. A truncated motion would provide the Court with an incomplete explanation about why Defendants are entitled to the relief requested in their Rule 59 motion. Vuitton, however, will not be prejudiced if this request is granted because Defendants will stipulate to an opposition by Vuitton of the same length. Judicial economy is also served by granting Defendants' request because it will afford this Court an opportunity to rule on all relevant issues. This will establish a more complete record should either party appeal, diminishing the likelihood of remand on unresolved issues. /// /// Defendants contacted Plaintiff's counsel via e-mail on January 18, 2010, requesting that Plaintiff stipulate to the filing of this motion for administrative relief for leave to exceed the page limits for its Rule 59 Motion and that Plaintiff stipulate to the relief requested herein. Plaintiff's counsel refused to stipulate to both the filing of this motion and to the relief requested herein. Declaration of James A. Lowe ("Lowe Decl.") ¶ 4. Accordingly, Defendants attach the Lowe Decl. in lieu of a stipulation under Northern District Civil Local Rule 7-12.
166982.1-10562-002-1/18/2010 1

1

DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ADMIN. RELIEF TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT ­ C 07-3952 JW (HRL)

Case5:07-cv-03952-JW Document266

Filed01/18/10 Page3 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Defendants respectfully request that the Court allowing Defendants to exceed the 25-page limit for their Rule 59 Motion by filing a motion of up to 45-pages.

Dated: January 18, 2010

GAUNTLETT & ASSOCIATES By: /s/James A. Lowe David A. Gauntlett James A. Lowe Preston K. Ascherin

Attorneys for Defendants Akanoc Solutions, Inc., Managed Solutions Group, Inc., and Steve Chen

166982.1-10562-002-1/18/2010

2

DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ADMIN. RELIEF TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT ­ C 07-3952 JW (HRL)