Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.
Filing
361
MOTION to Amend/Correct (84 in 1:12-cv-20271-RNS) Scheduling Order,,, MEMORANDUM OF LAW AND MOTION TO AMEND THE PROCEDURAL SCHEDULE by Apple Inc.. Responses due by 10/29/2012 (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit 9, # 11 Exhibit 10, # 12 Exhibit 11)Associated Cases: 1:12-cv-20271-RNS, 1:10-cv-23580-RNS(Pace, Christopher)
EXHIBIT 1
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Vlasis, Robert
Monday, September 17, 2012 11:42 AM
Marshall Searcy (marshallsearcy@quinnemanuel.com)
Moto-Apple-SDFL (Moto-Apple-SDFL@quinnemanuel.com); Weil_TLG Apple Moto FL
External
Apple/Motorola FL: Cutoff for New Products
Subject:
Marshall,
Following up on last Monday’s meet‐and‐confer, Apple continues to believe for reasons we have repeated that a firm
date should be set for adding new products to the case, and that the date should be tied to the contentions
deadline. Now that the contentions deadlines have been moved to November 7 and December 5, Apple proposes that
the cutoff date for adding new products should be October 8. Apple’s next generation iPhone, iPod, and iOS6 products
were announced last week; thus, any concern by Motorola that a cutoff date prior to the close of discovery would
exclude Apple’s new products is unfounded.
While we understood from a previous meet‐and‐confer that Motorola would propose a product‐based cutoff, we were
surprised to hear on Monday that Motorola continues to believe that new products should be added to the case up
through the close of discovery and even thereafter “on a case‐by‐case basis.” This proposal is unworkable because it
risks reopening discovery and would involve last‐minute requests for supplemental contentions, expert reports,
depositions, etc. It also will interfere with trial and witness preparation to the extent your proposal would permit new
products to be added up through trial.
If Motorola cannot agree to Apple’s proposal or provide a reasonable counter‐proposal by Friday, September 21, then
Apple intends to seek relief from Judge Scola on this issue.
Best regards,
Robert
Robert T. Vlasis III, Esq.
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
1300 Eye Street NW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20005-3314
robert.vlasis@weil.com
+1 202 682 7024 Direct
+1 202 857 0940 Fax
1
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?