Cisco Systems, Inc. et al v. OpenTV Inc. et al

Filing 66

ORDER denying 63 Motion to Clarify. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 8/13/2013. (ejdlc4S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/13/2013) Modified on 8/13/2013 (ejdlc1, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13

SAN JOSE DIVISION

14

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., ET AL.,

15
16
17

Plaintiffs,
v.
OPENTV INC., ET AL.,

18
19

Defendants.

20
21

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 5:13-CV-0282-EJD
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
CLARIFY

Presently before the court is Defendants OpenTv Inc. and Nagra USA, Inc.’s (collectively,

22

“Defendants”) Administrative Motion to Clarify that Discovery is Not Yet Open (Dkt. No. 63).

23

Specifically, Defendants request the following clarification: “clarify that discovery should not

24

proceed until after the hearing” on pending dispositive motions. As to that specific relief, the

25

motion is DENIED.

26

However, to the extent such information is of assistance to the parties, the court clarifies

27

its previous Order Denying Cisco’s Motion for Leave to Conduct Jurisdictional Discovery

28

(“Jurisdictional Discovery Order”) (Dkt. No. 46) as follows:
1
Case No.: 5:13-CV-0282-EJD
ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS’ ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CLARIFY