Timebase Pty Ltd v. Thomson Corporation, The

Filing 287

ORDER denying 273 Motion. Signed by Judge Joan N. Ericksen on September 27, 2011. (slf)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA TimeBase Pty Ltd., Plaintiff, v. Civil No. 07-1687 (JNE/JJG) ORDER The Thomson Corporation, West Publishing Corporation, and West Services, Defendants. In an Order dated January 21, 2011, the Court construed disputed claim terms. On August 11, 2011, the Court took under advisement Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, as well as two other motions. One week later, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Clarify the Claim Construction as it Relates to Summary Judgment. In it, Plaintiff asked the Court to adopt certain claim constructions proposed by Plaintiff or to clarify certain claim constructions. Plaintiff’s motion to clarify is a motion to reconsider the January 21 Order. Plaintiff did not comply with the Local Rule that governs motions to reconsider: Motions to reconsider are prohibited except by express permission of the Court, which will be granted only upon a showing of compelling circumstances. Requests to make such a motion, and responses to such requests, shall be made by letter to the Court of no more than two pages in length, which shall be filed and served in accordance with the ECF procedures. D. Minn. LR 7.1(h). Plaintiff neither requested nor received permission to file its motion. The Court discerns no compelling circumstances that would warrant reconsideration of the January 21 Order. Accordingly, the Court denies Plaintiff’s motion to reconsider [Docket No. 273]. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 27, 2011 s/ Joan N. Ericksen JOAN N. ERICKSEN United States District Judge

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?