AdvanceMe Inc v. RapidPay LLC
Filing
315
NOTICE by Merchant Money Tree, Inc., Reach Financial, LLC Submission Regarding the Time Needed for Trial (McSwane, Douglas)
AdvanceMe Inc v. RapidPay LLC
Doc. 315
Case 6:05-cv-00424-LED
Document 315
Filed 07/10/2007
Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION ADVANCEME, INC. Plaintiff VS. RAPIDPAY, LLC, BUSINESS CAPITAL CORPORATION, FIRST FUNDS LLC, MERCHANT MONEY TREE, INC., REACH FINANCIAL, LLC and FAST TRANSACT, INC. d/b/a SIMPLE CASH Defendant § § § § § § § § § § § §
CAUSE NO. 6:05CV424 LED
DEFENDANTS' SUBMISSION REGARDING THE TIME NEEDED FOR TRIAL In accordance with the Court's request in the pre-trial conference held on July 9, 2007, Defendants MERCHANT MONEY TREE, INC., and REACH FINANCIAL, LLC (Collectively, the "Defendants") hereby notify the Court that they would respectfully request the amount of time for each aspect of the trial as set forth below. The Parties have conferred and were unable to reach agreement with respect to the amount of time needed for each aspect of the trial. Therefore both parties are proffering their individual time estimates in separate submissions. DEFENDANTS' PROPOSED TIME Opening Statements Direct & Cross Examination Rebuttal Closing Arguments 15 minutes 15 minutes 18.5 hours
{A43\7560\0001\W0330641.1 }
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 6:05-cv-00424-LED
Document 315
Filed 07/10/2007
Page 2 of 3
Defendants respectfully request 18.5 hours for direct and cross examination, as their invalidity defense is based on prior public knowledge and prior public use of prior art methods and systems. Because Plaintiff has argued that Defendants' evidence of invalidity is insufficiently corroborated, Defendants must present substantial testimony of witnesses with knowledge in order to definitively establish that all evidence of invalidity is fully corroborated. Moreover, Defendants bear the burden of proving both invalidity and inequitable conduct by clear and convincing evidence, and they believe that a minimum of 18.5 hours of direct and cross is necessary to present their clear and convincing evidence on these issues. Defendants anticipate that Plaintiffs will request "mini openings" and "mini closings" for each day of trial. Defendants would argue that such "mini openings" and "mini closings" are unnecessary and that the evidence should speak for itself with the exception of a short opening statement to begin the trial and a short closing statement to end the trial.
Dated: July 10, 2007
Respectfully submitted, By: /s/ Douglas R. McSwane, Jr. Willem G. Schuurman Texas State Bar No. 17855200 Joseph D. Gray Texas State Bar No. 24045970 VINSON & ELKINS L.L.P. 2801 Via Fortuna, Suite 100 Austin, Texas 78746 Phone: (512) 542-8400 Fax: (512) 236-3476 E-mail: bschuurman@velaw.com JGray@velaw.com
{A43\7560\0001\W0330641.1 }
Case 6:05-cv-00424-LED
Document 315
Filed 07/10/2007
Page 3 of 3
-andDouglas R. McSwane, Jr. Texas State Bar No. 13861300 POTTER MINTON, P.C. 110 North College 500 Plaza Tower Tyler, Texas 75702 Phone: (903) 597-8311 Fax: (903) 593-0846 E-mail: dougmcscane@potterminton.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS MERCHANT MONEY TREE, INC. REACH FINANCIAL, LLC
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). Any other counsel of record will be served by facsimile transmission and/or first class mail this 10th day of July, 2007. /s/ Douglas R. McSwane, Jr. Douglas R. McSwane, Jr.
{A43\7560\0001\W0330641.1 }
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?