Minerva Industries, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. et al

Filing 64

Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by Sanyo North America Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Cone, John) Additional attachment(s) added on 10/5/2007 (sm, ).

Download PDF
Minerva Industries, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. et al Doc. 64 Case 2:07-cv-00229-TJW Document 64 Filed 10/04/2007 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MINERVA INDUSTRIES, INC., § § Plaintiff, § § vs. § § 1. MOTOROLA, INC.; § 2. NOKIA, INC.; § 3. NOKIA MOBILE PHONES, INC.; § 4. ALLTELL CORPORATION; § 5. ALLTELL COMMUNICATIONS § § WIRELESS, INC.; 6. ALLTELL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.; § 7. ALLTELL COMMUNICATIONS OF § TEXARKANA, INC.; § 8. ALLTELL WIRELESS OF § TEXARKANA, LLC; § 9. AT&T MOBILITY, LLC; § 10. BOOST MOBILE; § 11. DOBSON CELLULAR SYSTEMS d/b/a § CELLULAR ONE; § 12. HELIO, INC.; § 13. HELIO, LLC; § 14. HEWLETT-PACKWARD COMPANY; § 15. METROPCS, INC.; § 16. METROPCS TEXAS, LLC; § 17. METROPCS WIRELESS, INC.; § 18. QWEST WIRELESS, LLC; § 19. SOUTHERNLINC WIRELESS; § 20. SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION; § 21. SPRINT WIRELESS BROADBAND § § COMPANY, LLC; 22. SUNCOM WIRELESS OPERATING § COMPANY, LLC; § 23. T-MOBILE USA; § 24. TRACFONE WIRELESS, INC.; § 25. U.S. CELLULAR WIRELESS; § 26. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC.; § 27. VERIZON WIRELESS SERVICES, LLC; § 28. VIRGIN MOBIL USA, LLC; § 29. HTC CORPORATION; § 30. HTC AMERICA, INC.; § Civil Action No. 2:07-cv-229 [TJW] Jury Demanded Unopposed Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:07-cv-00229-TJW Document 64 Filed 10/04/2007 Page 2 of 4 31. KYOCERA WIRELESS CORPORATION; 32. KYOCERA AMERICA, INC.; 33. LG ELECTRONICS USA, INC.; 34. LG ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM U.S.A., INC.; 35. PALM, INC.; 36. PANTECH WIRELESS, INC.; 37. SANYO NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION; 38. UTSTARCOM, INC.; 39. SONY ERICSSON COMMUNICATIONS (USA), INC.; 40. SAMSUNG AMERICA, INC.; 41. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.; 42. SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC; and 43. SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, INC., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § DEFENDANT SANYO NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT: Defendant SANYO NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION files this Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond. The current deadline for Defendants to answer is October 4, 2007. Defendant respectfully requests an extension of time to and including December 3, 2007 to move, answer, or otherwise respond to the Complaint. This extension is not sought for delay. Counsel for Defendant has conferred with counsel for Plaintiff and represents to the Court that Plaintiff does not oppose this Motion. Case 2:07-cv-00229-TJW Document 64 Filed 10/04/2007 Page 3 of 4 WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant respectfully requests that its Motion be granted. DATED: October 4, 2007 Respectfully submitted, /s/ John M. Cone________ John M. Cone Texas State Bar No. 04660100 HITCHCOCK EVERT LLP 750 North St. Paul Street Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone: (214) 880-7002 Facsimile: (214) 953-1121 Email: jcone@hitchcockevert.com OF COUNSEL: Michael A. Dorfman KATTEN MUCHIN ROSENMAN L.L.P. 525 West Monroe Street Chicago, Illinois 60661-3693 Telephone: (312) 902-5658 Facsimile: (312) 577-4738 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT SANYO NORTH AMERICA CORP. Case 2:07-cv-00229-TJW Document 64 Filed 10/04/2007 Page 4 of 4 CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE Counsel for Defendant has conferred with counsel for Plaintiff and hereby represents to this Court that Plaintiff does not oppose this Motion. /s/ John M. Cone John M. Cone CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that all counsel of record who 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) on this the 4th day of October, 2007. Any other counsel of record will be served by first class mail. /s/ John M. Cone John M. Cone

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?