Evolutionary Intelligence, LLC v. Sprint Nextel Corporation et al

Filing 159

ORDER Relating Cases. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 7/28/14. (rmwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/28/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,

13

Plaintiff,

14

v.

15

Case Nos. C-13-04513 RMW, C-13-04201 DJ, C13-04202 SI, C-13-04203 MMC, C-13-04204 SI,
C-13-04205 WHO, C-13-04206 EJD, C-13-04207
JSW, C-13-03587 DMR

SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION,
SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS
COMPANY L.P., SPRINT SPECTRUM
L.P., SPRINT SOLUTIONS INC.,

16
17

Defendants.

18
19
20

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,
Plaintiff,

21
22
23
24

ORDER RELATING CASES

v.
APPLE, INC.,
Defendants.

25
26
27
28
ORDER RELATING CASES, Case Nos. C-1304513, C-13-04201, C-13-04202, C-13-04203, C-13-04204,
C-13-04205, C-13-04206, C-13-04207, C-13-03587

-1-

1
2

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,
Plaintiff,

3
4
5

v.
FACEBOOK, INC.,
Defendants.

6
7
8

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,
Plaintiff,

9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

v.

11

FOURSQUARE LABS, INC.,

12

Defendants.

13
14

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,

15

Plaintiff,

16

v.

17

GROUPON, INC.,

18

Defendants.

19
20

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,

21
22
23
24

Plaintiff,
v.
LIVINGSOCIAL, INC.,
Defendants.

25
26
27
28
ORDER RELATING CASES, Case Nos. C-1304513, C-13-04201, C-13-04202, C-13-04203, C-13-04204,
C-13-04205, C-13-04206, C-13-04207, C-13-03587

-2-

1
2

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,
Plaintiff,

3
4
5

v.
TWITTER, INC.,
Defendants.

6
7
8

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,
Plaintiff,

9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

v.

11

YELP, INC.,
Defendants.

12
13
14

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,

15

Plaintiff,

16

v.

17

MILLENIAL MEDIA, INC.,

18

Defendants.

19
20

The court orders that the above nine Evolutionary Intelligence cases be related. At the

21

hearing on July 11, 2014, the court also set a hearing for September 19, 2014 at 9:00 a.m. on

22

whether the stays should be lifted. The defendants’ joint opening brief of no more than 10 pages is

23

due August 15, 2014. Should any individual defendant wish to raise other arguments, the court

24

grants each individual defendant leave to file a separate brief of no more than 5 pages also due

25

August 15, 2014. Plaintiff’s opposition of no more than 10 pages is due August 29, 2014. Plaintiff

26

may also respond to any individual defendant’s brief with no more than the same number of pages

27

used by that defendant. Defendants’ joint reply brief of no more than 5 pages is due September 5,

28

2014, and individual defendants have leave to file separate replies of no more than 3 pages. The
ORDER RELATING CASES, Case Nos. C-1304513, C-13-04201, C-13-04202, C-13-04203, C-13-04204,
C-13-04205, C-13-04206, C-13-04207, C-13-03587

-3-

1

court would like the parties’ briefing to particularly address the advantages or disadvantages of

2

waiting until after the Patent Trial and Appeal Board makes a final decision in April to proceed with

3

the instant cases. The briefing should also address the prejudice, if any, of maintaining the stays

4

currently in effect.

5
6

Dated: July 28, 2014

_________________________________
RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge

7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER RELATING CASES, Case Nos. C-1304513, C-13-04201, C-13-04202, C-13-04203, C-13-04204,
C-13-04205, C-13-04206, C-13-04207, C-13-03587

-4-