Patent Rights Protection Group, LLC v. Video Gaming Technologies, Inc.

Filing 75

ORDER that PRPGs countermotions for jurisdictional discovery are granted. SPECs and VGTs renewed motions 61 62 to dismiss are denied without prejudice. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 8/18/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)

Download PDF
Patent Rights Protection Group, LLC v. Video Gaming Technologies, Inc. Doc. 75 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Before this Court are Defendant SPEC International, Inc.'s ("SPEC") Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #61), Defendant Video Gaming Technologies, Inc.'s ("VGT") Renewed Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. #62), and Plaintiff Patent Rights Protection Group, LLC's ("PRPG") oppositions to said motions (Doc. #63 and #65) which contained countermotions for jurisdictional discovery. This Court having reviewed the papers submitted in support of, in opposition to, and in reply to the motions and the countermotions, having further heard oral arguments on August 4, 2010, and for good cause appearing, /// /// /// /// /// PATENT RIGHTS PROTECTION GROUP, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, Plaintiff, vs. VIDEO GAMING TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Tennessee corporation and SPEC INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Michigan corporation, Defendants. UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA *** Case No. 2:08-cv-00662-JCM-LRL ORDER GRANTING COUNTERMOTIONS FOR JURISDICTIONAL DISCOVERY; DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE DEFENDANTS' RENEWED MOTIONS TO DISMISS Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that PRPG's countermotions for jurisdictional discovery are granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that SPEC's and VGT's renewed motions to dismiss are denied without prejudice. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DATED: August 18, 2010

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?