PA Advisors, LLC v. Google Inc. et al

Filing 369

Unopposed MOTION Motion for Leave to Consider as Timely Filed Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Google Inc's Motion for Summary Judgmemt re #366 Sealed Response to Motion, #367 Sealed Additional Attachments to Main Document by PA Advisors, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Wiley, Elizabeth)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION PA ADVISORS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE INC., et al., Defendants. § § § § § § § § §

Civil Action No. 2:07-cv-480-RRR JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

PLAINTIFF NXN TECH, LLC'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO CONSIDER AS TIMELY FILED PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO GOOGLE INC.,'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff nXn Tech, LLC (f/k/a PA Advisors, LLC) ("nXn") respectfully files this Motion for Leave, to which Defendant Google Inc. ("Google") has stated it is unopposed. 1. Pursuant to the Court's briefing schedule, Defendant Google's Motion for

Summary Judgment was filed on January 15, 2010. According to that same schedule, the Response in opposition of Plaintiff nXn was due ten days later, on January 25, 2010. 2. As indicated by the electronic filing notification the undersigned received of that

filing, nXn's response and exhibits in support regarding the Google Motion were officially filed at 12:22 a.m., January 26, 2010. 3. Opposing counsel for Google (and its co-defendant Yahoo! Inc. ("Yahoo")) were

informed, before the actual filing and service, that some delay in filing would be inevitable: a computer "crash" had slowed down the process of finalizing substantive arguments for the responses. 4. Defendant Yahoo! has represented to counsel for nXn that it will stipulate to the

timeliness of the nXn Response filed as to the Yahoo Motion for Summary Judgment.

Accordingly, Yahoo considers no motion for leave necessary regarding nXn's response to Yahoo's Motion for Summary Judgment. 5. nXn files this Motion then only as to the (i) nXn Response in Opposition to the

Motion for Summary Judgment of Google (Dkt. Nos. 366-367) and (ii) solely as to the question of timing of that response. 6. nXn requests that the Court grant this motion and deem the filing of the response--

22 minutes after the filing deadline--timely for purposes of the summary judgment briefing schedule.

2

Dated: January 26, 2010 Andrew W. Spangler LEAD COUNSEL SPANGLER LAW P.C. 208 N. Green Street, Suite 300 Longview, Texas 75601 [phone] [phone] (fax) [e-mail] David M. Pridham LAW OFFICE OF DAVID PRIDHAM 25 Linden Road Barrington, Rhode Island 02806 [phone] [phone] (fax) [e-mail] John M. Bustamante Texas Bar No. 24040618 BUSTAMANTE, P.C. 54 Rainey Street, No. 721 Austin, Texas 78701 Tel. [phone] Fax. [phone] Email:[e-mail] Kip Glasscock Texas State Bar No. 08011000 KIP GLASSCOCK P.C. 550 Fannin, Suite 1350 Beaumont, TX 77701 Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] Email: [e-mail]

Respectfully submitted, By: /s/ Elizabeth A. Wiley Marc A. Fenster, CA Bar No. 181067 CA Bar No. 181067 [e-mail] Andrew Weiss CA Bar No. 232974 [e-mail] Adam Hoffman CA Bar No. 218740 [e-mail] RUSS, AUGUST & KABAT 12424 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90025 [phone] [phone] (fax) Patrick R. Anderson PATRICK R. ANDERSON PLLC 4225 Miller Rd, Bldg. B-9, Suite 358 Flint, MI 48507 [phone] [phone] (fax) [e-mail] Debera W. Hepburn, Texas Bar No. 24049568 HEPBURN LAW FIRM PLLC P.O. Box 118218 Carrollton, TX 75011 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 888/205-8791 Email: [e-mail] Elizabeth A. Wiley Texas State Bar No. 00788666 THE WILEY FIRM PC P.O. Box. 303280 Austin, Texas 78703-3280 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail]

3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that the counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served today 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 electronic mail, facsimile transmission and/or first class mail on this same date. \s\ Elizabeth A. Wiley Elizabeth A. Wiley

4