Compression Labs Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Filing 160

Compression Labs Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Doc. 160

Case 2:04-cv-00158-DF

Document 160

Filed 11/01/2004

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION Compression Labs, Incorporated, Plaintiff v. Afga Corporation, et al. Defendants § § § § § § § § §

C.A. No. 2:04CV-158 DF JURY TRIAL

XEROX CORPORATION'S UNOPPOSED MOTION IN SUPPORT OF PROTECTIVE ORDER Plaintiff Compression Labs, Incorporated ("CLI") filed a Motion for Entry of Protective Order ("CLI's Motion") on October 28, 2004. Defendant Xerox Corporation ("Xerox") has no objection to the proposed Protective Order and therefore files this Unopposed Motion in support of the entry of the Protective Order attached as Exhibit A to CLI's Motion.

DATED: November 1, 2004

____________/s/ Scott W. Hejny___________ James P. Bradley, Attorney-in-Charge Texas State Bar No. 02826000 [e-mail] William O. Fifield Texas State Bar No. 24005203 [e-mail] Scott W. Hejny Texas State Bar No. 24038952 [e-mail] SIDLEY AUSTIN BROWN & WOOD LLP 717 North Harwood, Suite 3400 Dallas, Texas 75201 Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:04-cv-00158-DF

Document 160

Filed 11/01/2004

Page 2 of 3

Of Counsel Lance Lee Texas Bar No. 240004762 YOUNG, PICKETT & LEE, L.L.P. 4122 Texas Blvd. P.O. Box 1897 Texarkana, Texas 75504 Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Attorneys for Defendant Xerox Corporation

2

Case 2:04-cv-00158-DF

Document 160

Filed 11/01/2004

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been forwarded to Plaintiffs' counsel via email pursuant to the parties' agreement on this the 1st Day of November, 2004.

______/s/ Scott Hejny_______________ One of the Attorneys for Defendant Xerox Corporation

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE I certify that on November 1, 2004, the undersigned has conferred with counsel for Plaintiffs regarding the merits of this Motion. Counsel for Plaintiffs stated that they do not oppose the motion; accordingly, it is presented to the Court as unopposed. ______/s/ Scott Hejny_______________ One of the Attorneys for Defendant Xerox Corporation