Google Inc. et al v. Egger et al

Filing 110

Reply to Opposition re 105 MOTION Plaintiffs' Administrative Motion For Continuance of the Briefing and Hearing Schedule for Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, Transfer or Stay and Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike filed byL. Daniel Egger, Software Rights Archive LLC. (Kaplan, Lee) (Filed on 4/30/2009)

Google Inc. et al v. Egger et al

Doc. 110

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

[SEE SIGNATURE BLOCK FOR COUNSEL]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

12 GOOGLE INC., AOL LLC, YAHOO! 13 14 15 v. 16 L. DANIEL EGGER, SOFTWARE 17 TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Defendants RIGHTS ARCHIVE, LLC, and SITE Plaintiffs

INC., IAC SEARCH & MEDIA, INC., and LYCOS, INC.

Case No. CV08-03172RMW SOFTWARE RIGHTS ARCHIVE, LLC'S AND L. DANIEL EGGER'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF THE BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING ON THE MOTIONS SET FOR MAY 22, 2009

Software Rights Archive, LLC's and L. Daniel Egger's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Administrative Motion for Continuance of the Briefing Schedule and Hearing on the Motions Set for May 22, 2009 CASE NO. CV08-03172

1
Dockets.Justia.com

1

Software Rights Archive, LLC ("SRA") and L. Daniel Egger1 oppose the motion for

2 continuance. For many months, and again over the last 24 hours, SRA's counsel has tried to 3 ascertain what legitimate purpose is served by having a belated, later-filed case on the docket. 4 The accused infringers have never offered any plausible explanation. 5 6 7 8
Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs ask that the Court delay the presentation and submission of SRA's Motion to Dismiss, Transfer or Stay, which has been on file for over five months, so that they may obtain discovery purportedly concerning personal jurisdiction over SRA. But

9 SRA's motion is supported by independent bases that indisputably have nothing to do with, and 10 are unaffected by, the discovery sought by these Plaintiffs--including the pendency of a first11 filed case in Texas and a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs' 12 stated reason for continuance ignores this fact. They have forced SRA to litigate this dispute on 13
multiple fronts for too long, and SRA is entitled to have its motion heard.

14 15 16

In addition, now that the Eastern District of Texas has found that SRA has standing, that case will not be dismissed anytime soon. The Texas defendants have recently filed a motion to

17 transfer venue in the Eastern District of Texas, seeking transfer to this Court. As is customary, 18 the issue of venue will be decided in the regular order by the Court in which the first-filed case is 19 pending. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs have raised questions about the undersigned's representation of Site Tech in their motion to strike Site Tech's responsive pleading. Although the undersigned believes that its representation of Site Tech was proper, in light of the Plaintiffs' accusations, and in light of the fact that Site Tech's corporate status is currently suspended, this opposition is filed on behalf of SRA and Egger alone.
Software Rights Archive, LLC's and L. Daniel Egger's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Administrative Motion for Continuance of the Briefing Schedule and Hearing on the Motions Set for May 22, 2009 CASE NO. CV08-03172
1

SRA and Mr. Egger ask that the Court deny the motion for continuance and hear the Motion to Dismiss, Transfer, or Stay on May 22 as scheduled.

2

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

Respectfully submitted, /s/ Lee L. Kaplan Thomas F. Smegal, Jr. (Bar No. 34,819) One Sansome Street, 35th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Lee L. Kaplan (Texas Bar No. 11094400) Kristen L. McKeever (Texas Bar No. 24030775) Raj Duvvuri (Texas Bar No. 24054185) (admitted pro hac vice) 700 Louisiana Street, Suite 2300 Houston, TX 77002 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Jay D. Ellwanger (California Bar No. 217747)) DiNovo Price Ellwanger & Hardy LLP 7000 North MoPac Expressway Suite 350 Austin, Texas 78731 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants L. Daniel Egger and Software Rights Archive, LLC

Software Rights Archive, LLC's and L. Daniel Egger's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Administrative Motion for Continuance of the Briefing Schedule and Hearing on the Motions Set for May 22, 2009 CASE NO. CV08-03172

3

1 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
30 day of April, 2009.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing instrument has

2 been forwarded to all counsel of record pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on this the th
/s/ Lee L. Kaplan Lee L. Kaplan

Juanita R. Brooks Jason W. Wolff Fish & Richardson P.C. 12390 El Camino Real San Diego, California 92130 Thomas B. Walsh, IV Fish & Richardson P.C. 5000 Bank One Center 1717 Main St. Dallas, Texas 75201 Ramon K. Tabtiang Stephen A. Marshall Fish & Richardson P.C. 225 Franklin Street Boston, Massachusetts 02110-2804 Michael A. Jacobs Richard S.J. Hung Morrison & Foerster 425 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105

Claude M. Stern Jennifer A. Kash Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 560 Redwood Shores, CA 9406 Mark D. Baker Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP 51 Madison Ave., 22nd Floor New York, New York 10010

Software Rights Archive, LLC's and L. Daniel Egger's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Administrative Motion for Continuance of the Briefing Schedule and Hearing on the Motions Set for May 22, 2009 CASE NO. CV08-03172

4