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)

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