Prism Technologies v. AT&T et al
ORDER denying 215 motion for leave to supplement its invalidity contentions. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (JDR)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
PRISM TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
AT&T MOBILITY, LLC,
This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s
motion (Filing No. 215) to supplement its invalidity contentions
for good cause.
The defendant has filed a brief (Filing No. 216)
and index of evidence (Filing No. 217) in support of its motion.
The plaintiff has filed its brief (Filing No. 219) and index of
evidence (Filing No. 220) in opposition of the motion.
motion will be denied.
This case involves patent infringement.
Prism Technologies, L.L.C. (“Prism”) claims the defendant, AT&T
Mobility, L.L.C. (“AT&T”), has infringed against its patents.
The time has passed for AT&T to amend invalidity contentions
without leave of the Court.
AT&T must show “good cause” for
See Filing No. 68, 4-5.
Last month, in February, the Court granted AT&T leave
to amend its invalidity contentions (Filing No. 189 and Filing
As time passes, however, the prejudice which Prism
faces by AT&T’s amendments becomes more severe.
fact discovery has closed, the deadline for invalidity
contentions was five months ago, and Prism has less than two
weeks to prepare its affirmative expert reports.
The Court finds
the time between AT&T’s requested amendment and Prism’s expert
reports is too short to avoid prejudice.
IT IS ORDERED that AT&T’s motion to supplement its
invalidity contentions is denied.
DATED this 6th day of May, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lyle E. Strom
LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge
United States District Court
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?