Honeywell International Inc. v. Furuno Electric Co. Ltd. et al
Filing
138
ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff's Motion to Lift Stay 121 is GRANTED. The stay is lifted. 2. The parties are ordered to contact the Chambers of Magistrate Judge Leung to schedule a renewed Pretrial Conference for th is case. 3. The parties shall file an amended Rule 26(f) Report and proposed schedule as outlined in Local Rule Form 4 and Local Rule 16.2 at least seven days before the renewed Pretrial Conference, unless otherwise ordered by Magistrate Judge Leung. (Written Opinion). Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 8/6/12. (GRR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
Civil File No. 09-3601 (MJD/TNL)
NAVICO INC., and
RAYMARINE, INC.,
Defendants.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Lift Stay. [Docket
No. 121] On July 30, 2010, this Court stayed this patent case pending resolution
of reexamination proceedings before the United States Patent and Trademark
Office. [Docket No. 108]
On June 18, 2012, Plaintiff filed the current motion to lift the stay because
the reexamination process has been completed. Defendants agree that the stay
should be lifted.
Accordingly, based upon the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Lift Stay [Docket No. 121] is GRANTED.
The stay is lifted.
1
2. The parties are ordered to contact the Chambers of Magistrate
Judge Leung to schedule a renewed Pretrial Conference for this
case.
3. The parties shall file an amended Rule 26(f) Report and proposed
schedule as outlined in Local Rule Form 4 and Local Rule 16.2 at
least seven days before the renewed Pretrial Conference, unless
otherwise ordered by Magistrate Judge Leung.
Dated: August 6, 2012
s/ Michael J. Davis
Michael J. Davis
Chief Judge
United States District Court
2
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?