Rockstar Consortium US LP et al v. Google Inc

Filing 164

Opposed MOTION for Hearing by Google Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Sam Stake, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Text of Proposed Order Granting Google's Motion)(Perlson, David)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
ROCKSTAR CONSORTIUM US LP
AND NETSTAR TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
Plaintiffs,
v.
GOOGLE INC.
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 13-cv-00893-JRG-RSP
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

GOOGLE’S MOTION FOR HEARING ON ITS MOTION TO TRANSFER (DKT. 18),
CROSS-MOTION TO STAY (DKT. 97), MOTION FOR THE COURT TO ENTER ITS
MODEL ORDER (DKT. 105), MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’ INFRINGEMENT
CONTENTIONS (DKT. 122), AND MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLETE
INTERROGATORY RESPONSES (DKT. 136)
On September 16, 2014, the Court set the Nortel Motions for Protective Order (Dkt. 150,
152) for hearing on October 9, 2014. (Dkt. 154-55.) Defendant Google Inc. hereby respectfully
moves pursuant to Local Rule CV-7(g) to additionally set the following motions for hearing on
October 9:
•

Google’s Motion To Transfer Venue to the Northern District of California, filed January
10, 2014 (Dkt. 18)

•

Google’s Cross-Motion, in the Alternative, To Stay Pending Resolution of Its Transfer
Motion, filed June 25, 2014 (Dkt. 97)

•

Google’s Motion for the Court To Enter Its [Model] Order Focusing Patent Claims and
Prior Art To Reduce Costs, Limit the Number of Asserted Claims, and To Extend the
Deadline for the Parties To Comply with P.R. 4-2, filed July 2, 2014 (Dkt. 105)

•

Google’s Motion To Strike Plaintiffs’ Infringement Contentions, filed August 8, 2014
(Dkt. 122)

•

Google’s Motion To Compel Complete Interrogatory Responses, filed August 25, 2014
(Dkt. 136)1
1

In the event the Court is inclined to set a subset of these motions for hearing on
October 9, Google requests that priority be given Google’s motions which have been pending
longest, which is the order listed above.
01980.00010/6243427.1

1

All these motions are either already ripe for decision, or will be, by October 9. Expedient
resolution of these motions will serve the interests of judicial economy and justice, including for
the reasons set forth in Google’s briefing on these motions and in particular given the already
ongoing claim construction process and the rapidly approaching close of discovery on January 7,
2015. Lead and local counsel for the parties will be present at the October 9 hearing, and will be
available to answer any questions that the Court may have on these motions.
Plaintiffs have indicated they oppose Google’s motion for hearing, but have provided no
substantive grounds for opposing the relief sought, saying instead only that “it is up to the Court
to add any topics to the hearing.”2 (Ex. 1.) Google appreciates and understands that it is within
the Court’s discretion whether to set additional motions for hearing on October 9, but Plaintiffs’
opposition only threatens to further delay resolution of Google’s motions.
Accordingly, Google requests that its motion be granted.

2

Plaintiffs did indicate that if the Court sets Google’s motions for hearing on October 9
that they would want their motions set on October 9 as well. (Ex. 1.) Google has no objection to
the Court doing so.
01980.00010/6243427.1

2

DATED: September 22, 2014

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
By

/s/ David Perlson
J. Mark Mann
State Bar No. 12926150
G. Blake Thompson
State Bar No. 24042033
MANN | TINDEL | THOMPSON
300 West Main Street
Henderson, Texas 75652
[phone]
[phone] (fax)
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
Charles K. Verhoeven
[e-mail]
David A. Perlson
[e-mail]
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
San Francisco, California 94111-4788
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Google Inc.

01980.00010/6243427.1

3

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
I hereby certify that the parties have met and conferred in writing and telephonically
pursuant to Local Rule CV-7(h). In addition to meeting and conferring in writing, on September
22, 2014 counsel for Plaintiffs (Justin A. Nelson) and counsel for Defendant (David A. Perlson)
met and conferred telephonically regarding the issues presented in this motion. The parties were
unable to reach agreement.

/s/ David A. Perlson
David A. Perlson
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) on September 22, 2014.

Sam Stake

01980.00010/6243427.1

4