Illinois Computer Research, LLC v. Fish & Richardson, et al,

Filing 95

MOTION by Defendant Fish & Richardson P.C., Counter Claimant Fish & Richardson P.C., ThirdParty Plaintiff Fish & Richardson P.C., Counter Defendant Fish & Richardson P.C. for leave to file Instanter A Brief In Excess Of 15 Pages (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1- Combined Reply Memorandum In Support Of Fish & Richardson's Rule 12(C) Motions Against ICR And Harris#2 Exhibit A#3 Exhibit B#4 Exhibit C#5 Exhibit D#6 Exhibit E#7 Exhibit F#8 Exhibit G#9 Exhibit H#10 Exhibit I#11 Exhibit J#12 Exhibit K)(Bradford, David)

Illinois Computer Research, LLC v. Google Inc.

Doc. 95

Case 1:07-cv-05081

Document 95

Filed 01/22/2008

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION ILLINOIS COMPUTER RESEARCH, LLC, Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, v. FISH & RICHARDSON P.C., Defendant, Counterclaimant, ThirdParty Plaintiff, and Counterclaim Defendant, v. SCOTT C. HARRIS, Third-Party Defendant and Counterclaimant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 07 C 5081 Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Magistrate Judge Maria Valdez

FISH & RICHARDSON'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE INSTANTER A BRIEF IN EXCESS OF 15 PAGES Fish & Richardson P.C. ("Fish & Richardson") respectfully requests leave of this Court to file instanter a combined reply memorandum in support of Fish & Richardson's separate Rule 12(c) motions against Illinois Computer Research, LLC ("ICR") and Scott Harris, which exceeds the fifteen-page limit of Local Rule 7.1. In support of this motion, Fish & Richardson states: 1. ICR's Amended Complaint alleges, among other things, that Fish & Richardson

tortiously interfered with ICR's prospective economic advantage. (ICR Am. Compl. ¶¶ 22-25.) On November 21, 2007, Fish & Richardson moved to dismiss that claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). 2. Mr. Harris's Counterclaim alleges three counts against Fish & Richardson,

including tortious interference and defamation. (Harris Counterclaim ¶¶ 43-52.) On November 21, 2007, Fish & Richardson moved to dismiss those claims pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:07-cv-05081

Document 95

Filed 01/22/2008

Page 2 of 4

3.

On January 7, 2008, the Court granted ICR and Mr. Harris leave to file a

combined response brief in excess of fifteen pages. (Dkt. No. 86.) ICR's and Mr. Harris's response brief is twenty-one pages. 4. To reduce the volume of briefing, and to eliminate duplicative arguments, Fish &

Richardson has prepared a single combined reply brief in support of its separate motions against Mr. Harris and ICR. However, to reply adequately to ICR's and Mr. Harris's brief, Fish & Richardson's memorandum exceeds the fifteen-page limit set by this Court's rules. Fish & Richardson's memorandum, when set in 12-point type and double spaced is nineteen pages long. For readability, Fish & Richardson has refrained from using 1.5 line spacing, as permitted by the local rules, which would have the effect of shortening the brief. 5. Fish & Richardson's Combined Reply Memorandum In Support Of Its Rule 12(c)

Motions Against ICR and Harris is attached as Exhibit 1. Fish & Richardson respectfully requests that the Court deem Fish & Richardson's Combined Reply filed as of this date. 6. Fish & Richardson has asked counsel for ICR and Mr. Harris whether counsel

will object to this motion, but has not yet received a response. Fish & Richardson will advise the Court whether there will be an objection before the presentment of the motion. WHEREFORE, Fish & Richardson respectfully requests that its Motion For Leave To File Instanter A Brief In Excess of Fifteen Pages be granted and that the Court deem Fish & Richardson's Combined Reply Memorandum In Support Of Its Rule 12(c) Motions Against ICR and Harris filed as of this date.

2

Case 1:07-cv-05081

Document 95

Filed 01/22/2008

Page 3 of 4

January 22, 2008

Respectfully submitted, FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. By: s/ David J. Bradford One of its Attorneys

David J. Bradford Terrence J. Truax Eric A. Sacks Daniel J. Weiss JENNER & BLOCK LLP 330 N. Wabash Avenue Chicago, IL 60611 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 312 527-0484

3

Case 1:07-cv-05081

Document 95

Filed 01/22/2008

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing was filed with the Court by means of the Court's CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to the following counsel at their email address on file with the Court: Raymond P. Niro Paul K. Vickrey Richard B. Megley, Jr. Karen L. Blouin David J. Sheikh Niro, Scavone, Haller & Niro 181 W. Madison, Suite 4600 Chicago, Illinois 60602 L. Steven Platt Arnold and Kadjan 19 West Jackson Blvd., Suite 300 Chicago, IL 60604 [phone]

January 22, 2008. s/David J. Bradford JENNER & BLOCK LLP 330 North Wabash Avenue Chicago, Illinois 60611 Telephone No: 312 222-9350 Facsimile No: 312 527-0484

4