Brocade Communications Systems, Inc. et al v. A10 Networks, Inc. et al

Filing 252

ORDER by Judge Lucy H. Koh denying 216 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages and Striking Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment on Infringement(lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/18/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 8 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 BROCADE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS, INC., a Delaware corporation, and FOUNDRY NETWORKS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Plaintiffs, v. A10 NETWORKS, INC., a California corporation, LEE CHEN, an individual, RAJKUMAR JALAN, an individual, RON SZETO, an individual, LIANG HAN, an individual, STEVEN HWANG, an individual, and DAVID CHEUNG, an individual, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 10-CV-03428-LHK ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON INFRINGEMENT On October 11, 2011 Brocade Communications Systems, Inc., and Foundry Networks LLC 21 (“Brocade”) filed three motions for summary judgment. One of those motions, the motion for 22 summary judgment on infringement, is 72 pages, almost 3 times the page limit allowed by the local 23 rules. See Local Rule 7-4(b). Brocade did not seek leave with the Court to file an enlarged motion 24 before filing the motion itself, also in violation of the local rules. See id. A10 Networks, Inc. 25 (“A10”) moves to strike this motion for failure to comply with the local rules and for failure to 26 comply with the Court’s directive that summary judgment motions be limited to “anything for 27 which … claim construction is dispositive.” See ECF No. 250 at 2. 28 1 Case No.: 10-CV-03428-LHK ORDER STRIKING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON INFRINGEMENT 1 The Court strikes Brocade’s motion for summary judgment on infringement because 2 Brocade has failed to comply with the Civil Local Rules. Brocade may file one motion for 3 summary judgment on infringement, not to exceed 25 pages, by Friday, October 21, 2011. If 4 Brocade files a revised motion for summary judgment on infringement, A10 shall file its 5 opposition by November 15, 2011. Brocade may file a reply no later than November 25, 2011. All 6 other deadlines related to the claim construction briefing and the other motions for summary 7 judgment remain as set. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: October 18, 2011 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 _________________________________ LUCY H. KOH United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Case No.: 10-CV-03428-LHK ORDER STRIKING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON INFRINGEMENT

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?