Eyetalk365, LLC v. Zmodo Technology Corporation Limited
Filing
56
ORDER denying without prejudice 54 Motion to Compel Compliance With Patent Local Rule 3.4(A). Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 8/18/17. (mga)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-789-FDW-DCK
EYETALK365, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
ZMODO TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
LIMITED,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER
THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on “Plaintiff Eyetalk365, LLC’s Motion
To Compel Compliance With Patent Local Rule 3.4(A)” (Document No. 54) filed August 18,
2017. This motion has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
636(b), and immediate review is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion, the record,
and applicable authority, and following consultation with Judge Whitney’s chambers, the
undersigned will deny the motion.
The undersigned notes that pursuant to the “Utility Patent Claim Construction Scheduling
Order” the parties are required “to attempt in good faith to resolve discovery disputes without the
necessity of court intervention;” and if they fail, they shall “schedule and submit to an informal
telephonic conference before the referral magistrate judge.” (Document No. 39, p.5). In this
instance, the parties have not contacted the undersigned’s chamber to request a telephone
conference. As such, the motion will be denied without prejudice. Plaintiff shall again confer
with Defendant in attempt to resolve, or at least narrow, the instant dispute.
If the parties are unable to resolve their dispute, they may contact the undersigned’s law
clerk to request a telephone conference.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that “Plaintiff Eyetalk365, LLC’s Motion To Compel
Compliance With Patent Local Rule 3.4(A) (Document No. 54) is DENIED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.
Signed: August 18, 2017
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?