Wireless Recognition Technologies LLC v. A9.com, Inc. et al
Filing
122
Opposed MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental Brief Addressing the Impact of the Dismissal of Ricoh Entities on Defendants' Motion to Transfer re 62 Opposed MOTION to Change Venue to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)Opposed MOTION to Change Venue to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)Opposed MOTION to Change Venue to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) by A9.com, Inc., Amazon.com, Inc., Google, Inc.,, Nokia, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Smith, Michael)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
WIRELESS RECOGNITION
TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
Plaintiff,
vs.
A9.COM, INC., AMAZON.COM, INC.,
GOOGLE INC., NOKIA, INC., and
RICOH INNOVATIONS, INC.,
Defendants.
WIRELESS RECOGNITION
TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
Plaintiff,
vs.
NOKIA CORPORATION and RICOH
COMPANY, LTD.,
Defendants.
WIRELESS RECOGNITION
TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
Plaintiff,
vs.
A9.COM, INC., AMAZON.COM, INC.,
GOOGLE INC., NOKIA, INC., and
RICOH INNOVATIONS, INC.,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil No. 2:10-CV-00364-JRG
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil No. 2:10-CV-00365-JRG
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil No. 2:10-CV-00577-JRG
WIRELESS RECOGNITION
TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
Plaintiff,
vs.
NOKIA CORPORATION and RICOH
COMPANY, LTD.,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil No. 2:10-CV-00578-JRG
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF
ADDRESSING THE IMPACT OF THE DISMISSAL OF RICOH INNOVATIONS, INC.
AND RICOH COMPANY, LTD. ON THE DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO TRANSFER
Pursuant to Local Rule CV-7(k), Defendants A9.com, Inc., Amazon.com, Inc., Google
Inc., Nokia Inc., and Nokia Corporation respectfully request leave to file a two-page brief
addressing the impact that the dismissals of Ricoh Innovations, Inc. (“RII”) and Ricoh Company,
Ltd. (“RCL”) from the above-captioned cases have on Defendants’ pending motions to transfer
(Dkt. Nos. 62 (2:10-cv-364), 21 (2:10-cv-365), 36 (2:10-cv-577), and 22 (2:10-cv-578).)
At the time that the motions to transfer were filed in the above-captioned cases, RII was a
party to the -364 and -577 cases, and RCL was a party to the -365 and -578 cases. Thus, in the
briefing on the motions to transfer, the RII employees were addressed as party witnesses located
in the Northern District of California, the proposed transferee venue. Now that RII and RCL
have been dismissed, the Court may believe that the RII employees are no longer relevant to the
venue analysis. Thus, Defendants request leave to file a short, supplemental brief to address this
change in facts in order to show that some of the RII witnesses in the Northern District of
California remain highly relevant to the disputed issues in these cases, but now as third-party
witnesses. (See Attachment A hereto.)
09234-0001/LEGAL22575591.1
-2-
In particular, in their invalidity contentions, Defendants have cited to five separate prior
art patents on which Ricoh employees are the named inventors, a prior art publication by several
of those Ricoh employees, and a prior art notebook that reflects the prior invention by one of
those employees. Thus, the dismissal of RII and RCL has created a material change in fact,
rendering these former party witnesses as third-party witnesses located in the proposed transferee
district.
Thus, Defendants request leave to file a short, supplemental brief on this material change
in fact relevant to the pending motions to transfer.
09234-0001/LEGAL22575591.1
-3-
Dated: January 31, 2012
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Michael C. Smith
Michael C. Smith
michaelsmith@siebman.com
Texas State Bar No. 18650410
SIEBMAN, BURG, PHILLIPS & SMITH, LLP
P.O. Box 1556
Marshall, TX 75671-1556
Telephone: 903.938.8900
Facsimile: 972.767.4620
James F. Valentine (admitted pro hac vice)
JValentine@perkinscoie.com
California State Bar No. 149269
Daniel T. Shvodian (admitted pro hac vice)
DShvodian@perkinscoie.com
California State Bar No. 184576
Perkins Coie LLP
3150 Porter Drive
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1212
Telephone: 650.838.4300
Facsimile: 650.838.4350
Attorneys for Defendants and
Counterclaimants
A9.COM, INC., AMAZON.COM, INC., and
GOOGLE INC.
09234-0001/LEGAL22575591.1
-4-
/s/ Michael C. Smith
Michael C. Smith
michaelsmith@siebman.com
Texas State Bar No. 18650410
SIEBMAN, BURG, PHILLIPS & SMITH, LLP
P.O. Box 1556
Marshall, TX 75671-1556
Telephone: 903.938.8900
Facsimile: 972.767.4620
Robert F. Perry (admitted pro hac vice)
Allison H. Altersohn (admitted pro hac vice)
KING & SPALDING LLP
1185 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: 212.556.2100
Facsimile: 212.556.2222
E-mail: rperry@kslaw.com
E-mail: aaltersohn@kslaw.com
Attorneys for Defendant
NOKIA INC. and NOKIA CORPORATION
09234-0001/LEGAL22575591.1
-5-
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in
compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a). As such, this document was served on all counsel who are
deemed to have consented to electronic service. Local Rule CV-5(a)(3)(A). Pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 5(d) and Local Rule CV-5(d) and (e), all other counsel of record not deemed to have
consented to electronic service were served with a true and correct copy of the foregoing by
email, on this 31st day of January, 2012.
/s/ Michael C. Smith
Michael C. Smith
CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
On January 31, 2012, pursuant to Local Rule CV-7(h), and on behalf of the Defendants
filing this motion, Daniel Shvodian, counsel for Defendants A9.com, Inc., Amazon.com, Inc.,
Google Inc. held a teleconference with Plaintiff’s counsel, Cameron Tousi, regarding
Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Brief Addressing the Impact of the
Dismissal of Ricoh Innovations, Inc. and Ricoh Company, Ltd. on Their Motions to Transfer.
The discussions conclusively ended in an impasse with Plaintiff’s counsel indicating he would
oppose the motion.
Dated: January 31, 2012
/s/ Michael C. Smith
Michael C. Smith
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?