Elan Microelectronics Corporation v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 367

MOTION for Leave to File Apple Inc.'s Opposition to Elan Microelectronics Corporation's Motion to Compel Discovery Related to Apple iOS Applications for the Accused Products on August 2, 2011 filed by Apple, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Walter, Derek) (Filed on 8/2/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

MATTHEW D. POWERS (Bar No. 104795)
[e-mail]
TENSEGRITY LAW GROUP LLP
201 Redwood Shores Parkway, Suite 401
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
JARED BOBROW (Bar No. 133712)
[e-mail]
SONAL N. MEHTA (Bar No. 222086)
[e-mail]
DEREK C. WALTER (Bar. No. 246322)
[e-mail]
NATHAN GREENBLATT (Bar No. 262279)
[e-mail]
WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
Silicon Valley Office
201 Redwood Shores Parkway
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

12
13

Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff
Apple Inc.

14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN JOSE DIVISION

17
18

ELAN MICROELECTRONICS
CORPORATION,

21
22
23

APPLE INC.’S UNOPPOSED MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO FILE ITS
OPPOSITION TO ELAN
MICROELECTRONICS
CORPORATION’S MOTION TO
COMPEL DISCOVERY RELATED TO
APPLE iOS APPLICATIONS FOR THE
ACCUSED PRODUCTS ON AUGUST
2, 2011

Plaintiff and Counterclaim
Defendant,

19
20

Case No. C-09-01531 RS (PSG)

v.
APPLE INC.,
Defendant and Counterclaim
Plaintiff.

24
25
26
27
28
APPLE’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OPPOSITION ON
AUGUST 2, 2011

1

Case No. C-09-01531 RS (PSG)

1

On July 15, 2011, plaintiff Elan Microelectronics Coproration (“Elan”) filed its Motion to

2

Compel Discovery Related to iOS Applications for the Accused Products. See Dkt. No. 341. The

3

motion to compel was accompanied by a motion to shorten the hearing schedule from August 23,

4

2011 to August 2, 2011. See Dkt. No. 343. Defendant Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) opposed Elan’s

5

motion to shorten time, and on July 18, 2011 the Court denied the motion to shorten time. See

6

Dkt. No. 346.

7

Following the denial of Elan’s motion to shorten time, counsel for Apple made an

8

inadvertent calendaring error in determining the date that its opposition to Elan’s motion to

9

compel would be due. In particular, counsel for Apple inadvertently applied the previous Civil

10

Local Rule briefing schedule to erroneously determine that its opposition would be due on

11

Tuesday, August 2, 2011, rather than on Friday, July 29, 2011. On the afternoon of Monday

12

August 1, 2011, counsel for Elan notified Apple that it had not filed its opposition on schedule,

13

and requested clarification as to whether Apple would in fact be filing an opposition. Apple

14

confirmed that it would oppose Elan’s motion, and informed Elan of the calendaring error. Apple

15

further asked Elan to confirm that it would not oppose an extension of time to allow Apple to file

16

its opposition on August 2, 2011. Elan confirmed that it would not oppose such an extension.

17

See Declaration of Derek C. Walter in Support of Apple’s for Leave to File Opposition to Elan’s

18

Motion to Compel Discovery Related to iOS Applications for the Accused Products on August 2,

19

2011, Exh. A.

20

Accordingly, Apple hereby moves for leave to submit its Opposition to Elan’s Motion to

21

Compel Discovery Related to iOS Applications for the Accused Products (filed concurrently

22

herewith) on August 2, 2011, rather than on July 29, 2011. As noted above, the modest delay of

23

two business days is due entirely to an inadvertent calendaring error. Furthermore, Elan will not

24

be prejudiced by the delay, as it will still have the full seven days to prepare its reply, which will

25

be due on August 9, 2011. Additionally, under this schedule, the Court will be in possession of

26

all papers regarding Elan’s motion a full 14 days in advance of the motion hearing on August 23,

27

2011.

28
APPLE’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OPPOSITION
ON AUGUST 2, 2011

2

Case No. C-09-01531 RS (PSG)

1

Dated: August 2, 2011

WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP

2
3

By:

4
5

/s/ Sonal N. Mehta
Sonal N. Mehta
Attorneys for Defendant and
Counterclaim Plaintiff Apple Inc.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
APPLE’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OPPOSITION
ON AUGUST 2, 2011

3

Case No. C-09-01531 RS (PSG)