Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 340 Report and Recommendations. Huaweis objections are OVERRULED. The Magistrate Judges Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED Huaweis motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is DENIED. Signed by Judge Rodney Gilstrap on 9/27/2017. (ch, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO. LTD,
T-MOBILE US, INC., T-MOBILE U.S.A.,
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
Huawei objects to Judge Payne’s recommendation that Huawei’s motion to dismiss TMobile’s counterclaims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction be denied. 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.
It is ORDERED:
(1) Huawei’s objections are OVERRULED.
(2) The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED.
(3) Huawei’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is DENIED.1
So Ordered this
Sep 28, 2017
Dkt. 371 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00052;
Dkt. 329 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00055;
Dkt. 314 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00056;
Dkt. 312 in Case No. 2:16-cv-00057.
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?