Ford Motor Company v. Versata Software, Inc., et al

Filing 275

ORDER on Motion Hearing. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Plaintiff, Case No. 15-cv-10628 (consolidated with Case No. 15-11624) Hon. Matthew F. Leitman v. VERSATA SOFTWARE, INC. et al. Defendants. _________________________________/ ORDER ON MOTION HEARING On March 31, 2017, the Court held a hearing on three pending motions:  Versata’s motion to dismiss Ford’s inequitable conduct claim (ECF #245);  Ford’s motion to dismiss Versata’s counterclaims under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (the “DMCA”) (ECF #253); and  Ford’s motion to exclude Versata’s new trade secret, copyright, and patent infringement contentions (ECF #259). For the reasons stated on the record at the hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:  Versata’s motion to dismiss Ford’s inequitable conduct claim (ECF #245) is GRANTED, and Ford’s inequitable conduct claim is DISMISSED; 1  Ford’s motion to dismiss Versata’s counterclaims under the DMCA (ECF #253) is GRANTED, and those counterclaims are DISMISSED. However, the Court will allow Versata to file an amended counterclaim under Section 1202 (only) of the DMCA (17 U.S.C. §1202). The amended counterclaim under Section 1202 should address the concerns that the Court expressed on the record with respect to the counterclaim as originally pleaded. Versata shall file such an amended counterclaim under Section 1202 by no later than seven (7) days from the date of this Order. Ford shall respond to the amended counterclaim within ten (10) days of its filing.  Ford’s motion to exclude Versata’s new trade secret, copyright, and patent infringement contentions (ECF #259) is DENIED. However, the Court will extend all of the dates on the current scheduling order in order to accommodate the addition of the new contentions into this action. The Court directs the parties to meet and confer promptly in an effort to agree upon extensions of the current dates, and if an agreement is reached, the parties shall submit a proposed stipulated scheduling order to the Court. If the parties cannot agree, Ford shall file a motion to extend the dates in which Ford presents its proposed schedule and the reasons supporting that schedule, and Versata shall respond to the 2 motion with its proposed schedule and supporting reasons. Ford’s motion, if necessary, shall be filed within thirty (30) days from the entry of this order, and Versata’s response to the motion shall be filed within seven (7) days of the filing of the motion by Ford. IT IS SO ORDERED.         Dated: April 3, 2017     s/Matthew F. Leitman MATTHEW F. LEITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on April 3, 2017, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail. s/Holly A. Monda Case Manager (313) 234-5113 3

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?