Hovsepian v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 57

Memorandum in Opposition re 55 MOTION to Strike Defendant Apple, Inc.'s Notice of Motion and Motion to Strike Class Allegations from Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint filed byAram Hovsepian. (Shub, Jonathan) (Filed on 11/13/2009)

Download PDF
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 MARSHALL GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP BRADFORD P. LYERLA (pro hac vice) KEVIN D. HOGG (pro hac vice) JEFFREY H. DEAN (pro hac vice) GREGORY STANTON (pro hac vice) ANDREW RAYMOND (pro hac vice) 6300 Sears Tower Chicago, Illinois 60606 (312) 474-6300 (telephone) (312) 474-0448 (telecopier) blyerla@marshallip.com khogg@marshallip.com jdean@marshallip.com gstanton@marshallip.com araymond@marshallip.com COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND 12 ADDITIONAL CABLE TELEVISION DEFENDANTS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION ACACIA MEDIA TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, Plaintiff, - vs. NEW DESTINY INTERNET GROUP, et al., Defendants. Case No. C 05-01114 JW (HRL) MDL NO. 1665 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT'S CONSTRUCTION OF THE TERM "REMOTE LOCATIONS" DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2005 TIME: 9 A.M. COURTROOM 8 HON. JAMES WARE AND ALL RELATED AND/OR CONSOLIDATED CASE ACTIONS Case No. C 05-01114 JW (HRL) MDL NO. 1665 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT'S CONSTRUCTION OF THE TERM "REMOTE LOCATIONS" 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 TO PLAINTIFF ACACIA MEDIA TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION AND ITS COUNSEL OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on September 8, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the above-captioned court, in Courtroom No. 8 of the San Jose Federal Courthouse, 280 South 1st Street, San Jose, CA 95113, defendants Armstrong Group, Inc., Arvig Communications Systems, Inc., Block Communications, Inc., Cannon Valley Communications, Inc., Charter Communications, Inc., East Cleveland TV and Communications LLC, Loretel Cablevision, Massillon Cable TV, Inc., Mid Continent Media, Inc., NPG Cable, Inc., Sjoberg Cablevision, Inc., U.S. Cable Holdings L.P., and Wide Open West, LLC will and hereby move for reconsideration of the Court's construction of the term "remote locations." This motion is supported by defendants' "MEMORANDUM OF LAW AND FACT FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT'S CONSTRUCTION OF THE TERM "REMOTE LOCATIONS" filed and served on all counsel of record on July 28, 2005. The following additional parties have given notice that they join in this motion: Cable America Corp., Cable One, Inc., Cequel III Communications I, LLC (d/b/a Cebridge Connections), Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, Coxcom, Inc., DirecTV Group, Inc., Hospitality Network, Inc., and Mediacom Communications Corporation. Case No. C 05-01114 JW (HRL) MDL NO. 1665 -1- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT'S CONSTRUCTION OF THE TERM "REMOTE LOCATIONS" 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 Case No. C 05-01114 JW (HRL) MDL NO. 1665 DATED: July 29, 2005 BRADFORD P. LYERLA (pro hac vice) KEVIN D. HOGG (pro hac vice) JEFFREY H. DEAN (pro hac vice) GREGORY G. STANTON (pro hac vice) ANDREW D. RAYMOND (pro hac vice) MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP 6300 Sears Tower 233 South Wacker Drive Chicago, Illinois 60606-6357 By: /s/ Kevin D. Hogg Kevin D. Hogg COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS ARMSTRONG GROUP, ARVIG COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS, BLOCK COMMUNICATIONS, INC., CANNON VALLEY COMMUNICATIONS, INC., CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., EAST CLEVELAND CABLE TV AND COMMUNICATIONS LLC, LORETEL CABLEVISION, MASSILLON CABLE TV INC., MIDCONTINENT MEDIA, INC., NPG CABLE, INC., SJOBERG'S CABLEVISION, INC., US CABLE HOLDINGS LP, AND WIDE OPEN WEST LLC -2- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT'S CONSTRUCTION OF THE TERM "REMOTE LOCATIONS"

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?