Motorola Mobility, Inc. et al v. TiVo Inc.

Filing 14

ORDER SETTING HEARING re 1 MOTION to Compel Google to Produce Documents in Response to Subpoena filed by TiVo Inc.. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on May 23, 2013. (psglc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/23/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC. and
GENERAL INSTRUMENT CORP.,

12
13
14
15
16
17

Plaintiffs,
v.
TIVO INC.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 13-80015 PSG
ORDER SETTING HEARING RE:
STATUS OF TIVO INC.’S MOTION
TO COMPEL
(Re: Docket No. 1)

Tivo, Inc. (“Tivo”) seeks to compel Google Inc. (“Google”) to provide responsive
documents to a subpoena relating to a patent infringement suit in the Eastern District of Texas

18
between Tivo and Motorola Mobility, Inc. (“Motorola”), a Google subsidiary. Google noted in its
19
20

opposition that Tivo ought to secure the documents from Motorola rather than seek them from

21

Google. Tivo stated in its reply and at the hearing that it indeed had filed in the Eastern District of

22

Texas a motion to compel Motorola to produce similar documents but that it believed Google had

23

other responsive materials. It also filed a motion to compel production of documents against Arris

24

Group Inc. (“Arris”), yet another entity that may have the documents Tivo wants.

25

The court has learned from its own research that the parties resolved those motions to

26
compel prior to a hearing with Judge Gilstrap. Given that no party informed the court of the
27
28

resolutions, let alone the details of the discovery negotiations, the court is unclear what, if any,
1

Case No.: 13-80015 PSG
ORDER

1

dispute remains between Tivo and Google regarding Google’s production. The parties therefore

2

shall appear for a telephonic hearing tomorrow, May 24, 2013 at 10:30 a.m., to explain the status of

3

Tivo’s motion. The parties should be prepared to explain to the court exactly what documents Tivo

4

obtained from Motorola and Arris that overlap with Tivo’s request to Google and what responsive

5

documents, if any, Tivo believes Google possesses that Tivo has not yet received.

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8

Dated: May 23, 2013

_________________________________
PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge

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
2

Case No.: 13-80015 PSG
ORDER