Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 228

ORDER regarding 212 Request for Hearing on Motorola's Motion to Amend Schedule to Serve Supplemental Invalidity Contentions. See ORDER for instructions. Parties have until February 7, 2012 to comply. Signed by Judge Robert N. Scola, Jr. on 2/3/2012. (jky)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 1:10cv023580-Civ-RNS MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC., Plaintiff, v. APPLE INC., Defendant. APPLE INC., Counterclaim Plaintiff, v. MOTOROLA, INC. and MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC., Counterclaim Defendants. ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR HEARING THIS MATTER is before the Court upon [ECF No. 212] Motorola’s Request for Hearing on its Motion to Amend the Procedural Schedule to Serve Supplemental Invalidity Contentions. Upon consideration, the Court finds that a hearing on Motorola’s Motion is appropriate. Before setting the hearing for a date certain, however, the Court would like the parties’ input as to whether the Court would benefit from a technological tutorial, similar to the one put on for the predecessor judge, prior to holding a hearing on Motorola’s Motion. The Court’s schedule would permit both a tutorial and hearing to be held within the next couple of weeks. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: 1. Motorola’s request for a hearing is GRANTED. 2. No later than February 7, 2012, the parties are directed to file a joint notice with the Court indicating their position on whether a tutorial should be held. 3. Once the Court has received the parties’ position, it will set this matter for hearing in the next couple of weeks. DONE and ORDERED in chambers at Miami, Florida on February 3, 2012. ________________________________ ROBERT N. SCOLA, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies to: Counsel of record

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?