EICES Research, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al

Filing 38

ORDER denying 11 Motion to Consolidate Cases. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 12/1/14. Counsel is reminded to read the order in its entirety for critical information. (O'Brien, C.)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DNISION EICES RESEARCH, INC., Plaintiff, v. APPLE, INC., Defendant. EICES RESEARCH, INC., Plaintiff, v. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 5:14-CV-489-D ) ) ) ) ) No. 5:14-CV-490-D ) SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., et al., ) ) Defendants. ) EICES RESEARCH, INC., Plaintiff, v. MOTOROLA MOBILITY, LLC., Defendant. EICES RESEARCH, INC., Plaintiff, v. LG ELECTRONICS, INC., et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER No. 5:14-CV-491-D No. 5:14-CV-492-D Plaintiff filed a motion for an order consolidating the three above-captioned related patent infringement cases into cause number 5:14-CV-489-D, EICES Research. Inc. v. Apple. Inc., for all pretrial purposes, including discovery and claim construction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a). Some pretrial consolidation would appear to promote judicial economy and avoid unnecessary costs and delay. The parties shall meet and confer concerning pretrial consolidation and seek to reach an agreement. The parties shall describe any such agreement in their joint case management proposal. Accordingly, the motion to consolidate is DENIED without prejudice. SO ORDERED. This _j_ day of December 2014. Chief United States District Judge 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?