Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al

Filing 332

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 321 Report and Recommendations, Denying 246 Motion for Summary Judgment. Huawei Objection 327 OVERRULED. Signed by Judge Rodney Gilstrap on 9/6/2017. (ch, )

Download PDF
Case 2:16-cv-00055-JRG-RSP Document 332 Filed 09/06/17 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 14623 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO. LTD, § § § § § § v. T-MOBILE US, INC., T-MOBILE U.S.A., INC., Case No. 2:16-CV-00052-JRG-RSP Case No. 2:16-CV-00055-JRG-RSP Case No. 2:16-CV-00056-JRG-RSP Case No. 2:16-CV-00057-JRG-RSP ORDER Huawei Technologies Co. LTD (“Huawei”) objects to Judge Payne’s recommendation that Huawei’s motion for summary judgment on the affirmative defenses and counterclaims filed by T-Mobile US, Inc., and T-Mobile U.S.A. Inc. (collectively, “T-Mobile”) relating to Huawei’s commitments to the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (“ETSI”) be denied.1 Having reviewed the objections, and having considered the Report and Recommendation de novo, the Court finds no reason to reject or modify the recommended disposition. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Accordingly, It is ORDERED: (1) Huawei’s objections are OVERRULED. (2) Judge Payne’s Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. (3) Huawei’s motions for summary judgment are DENIED.2 1 Dkt. 358 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00052; Dkt. 327 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00055; Dkt. 313 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00056; Dkt. 311 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00057. 2 Dkt. 257 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00052; Dkt. 246 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00055; Dkt. 248 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00056; 1 Case 2:16-cv-00055-JRG-RSP Document 332 Filed 09/06/17 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 14624 SIGNED this 19th day of December, 2011. So ORDERED and SIGNED this 6th day of September, 2017. ____________________________________ RODNEY GILSTRAP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dkt. 242 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00057. 2

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?