Compression Labs Incorporated v. Dell, Inc et al

Filing 67

RESPONSE to Motion re 63 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) or, in the Alternative, to Transfer filed by Compression Labs Incorporated. (Buether, Eric)

Compression Labs Incorporated v. Dell, Inc et al

Doc. 67

Case 2:04-cv-00159-DF

Document 67

Filed 12/02/2004

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION COMPRESSION LABS, INC., Plaintiff, v. DELL INC., et al., Defendants. § § § § § § § § §

C. A. No. 2:04-CV-159-DF

PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO THE TOSHIBA DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO RULE 12(b)(1) OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO TRANSFER CLI files this response to the Toshiba Defendants' motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to transfer. The Toshiba Defendants argue that CLI lacked standing to bring this lawsuit as of April 22, 2004 (the date of the Original Complaint), because GI was not joined as a plaintiff. They further argue that the Court should consider this case the second-filed action and should give first-filed preference to a declaratory judgment action filed by TACP in Delaware on July 2, 2004.1 These arguments are identical to those previously asserted and briefed by other defendants in this and the other two `672 Patent infringement matters pending before this Court.2 CLI has fully

The declaratory judgment action in the District of Delaware was filed by a number of the defendants in this lawsuit as C.A. No. 04-818-SLR. However, with respect to the Toshiba Defendants, only TACP is named as a party in the Delaware action, and TAIS, TAEC, and TAI are not parties in Delaware even though they are named defendants in the instant lawsuit. As the Court is aware, the other two matters are C.A. No. 2:04-CV-159-DF and CA No. 2:04-CV-294-DF.
2

1

1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:04-cv-00159-DF

Document 67

Filed 12/02/2004

Page 2 of 3

briefed its responses to these arguments and hereby incorporates by reference its responses as if fully set forth herein. See, e.g., C. A. No. 2:04-CV-159-DF Docket Entry Nos. 25, 35, 54; C. A. No. 2:04CV-158-DF Docket Entry Nos. 70, 72, 98, 102, 144; C. A. No. 2:04-CV-294-DF Docket Entry Nos. 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 78, 83, 84, 108, 109. CLI asks the Court to deny the Toshiba Defendants' motion to dismiss or transfer for the reasons set forth in those previously filed pleadings. Dated: December 2, 2004 Respectfully submitted, GODWIN GRUBER, LLP

By:

/s/ Eric W. Buether Eric W. Buether Attorney in Charge Texas State Bar No. 03316880 ebuether@godwingruber 1202 Elm Street, Suite 1700 Dallas, Texas 75270 [phone] [phone] Facsimile ATTORNEYS LABS, INC. FOR COMPRESSION

2

Case 2:04-cv-00159-DF

Document 67

Filed 12/02/2004

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3). Any other counsel of record will be served by facsimile transmission and/or first class mail this 2nd day of December 2004.

/s/ Eric W. Buether

D1079907v1\14017.0002 PLEADINGS

3