EMG Technology, LLC v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 95

Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File (to Amend Infringement Contentions) by EMG Technology, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Proposed First Amended Infringement Contentions and Appendix, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Ainsworth, Charles)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION EMG TECHNOLOGY, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 6:08-cv-447-LED APPLE, INC., AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., BLOOMBERG, L.P., CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC., UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., Defendants. UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS Pursuant to Patent Rule 3-6(b) of the Rules of Practice for Patent Cases before the Eastern District of Texas, Plaintiff EMG Technology, LLC ("EMG") respectfully submits this Unopposed Motion for Leave to Amend Infringement Contentions. On June 5, 2009, pursuant to this Court's Order dated April 21, 2009, and Patent Rule 3-1 of the Rules of Practice for Patent Cases before the Eastern District of Texas, EMG served its Patent Rule 3-1 Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions ("Infringement Contentions"). Subsequently, the parties met and conferred and agreed that EMG may amend its Infringement Contentions to correct typographical errors relating to the identification of the asserted patent claims and to clarify EMG's contentions under Patent Rule 3-1(f). Attached as Exhibit A is a copy of EMG's proposed First Amended Infringement Contentions and Appendix A thereto, with redlining to show the agreed upon changes. At this time, no changes are being JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 20218317.1 -1- made to the other portions of EMG's Infringement Contentions served on June 5, 2009, including Exhibits A-H to Appendix A and Appendices B-J, including exhibits thereto. Good cause exists for the proposed amendments because they correct typographical errors and clarify EMG's contentions under P.R. 3-1(f). No prejudice to the Court or the parties will result from the proposed amendments because this case is in its earliest stages and Defendants Apple, Inc., American Airlines, Inc., Bloomberg, LP, Continental Airlines, Inc., and United Parcel Service, Inc. do not oppose the amendments. Accordingly, EMG respectfully requests the Court to enter the proposed Order Granting Unopposed Motion for Leave to Amend Infringement Contentions submitted concurrently herewith. Dated July 13, 2009 OF COUNSEL: Jeffer, Mangels, Butler and Marmaro, LLP Stanley M. Gibson (Cal. Bar No. 162329) smg@jmbm.com Joshua S. Hodas, Ph.D. (Cal. Bar No. 250812) jsh@jmbm.com 1900 Avenue of the Stars, Seventh Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 203-8080 Facsimile: (310) 203-0567 Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP Robert D. Becker (Cal. Bar No. 160648) rbecker@manatt.com Respectfully submitted, By: /s/ Charles Ainsworth Charles Ainsworth State Bar No. 00783521 Robert Christopher Bunt State Bar No. 00787165 PARKER, BUNT & AINSWORTH, P.C. 100 E. Ferguson, Suite 1114 Tyler, TX 75702 903/531-3535 903/533-9687 E-mail: charley@pbatyler.com E-mail: rcbunt@pbatyler.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF, EMG TECHNOLOGY, LLC 20218317.1 -2- Shawn G. Hansen (Cal. Bar No. 197033) shansen@manatt.com 1001 Page Mill Road, Building 2 Palo Alto, CA 94304 Telephone: (650) 812-1300 Facsimile: (650) 213-0260 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that all counsel of record, who are deemed to have consented to electronic service, are being served this 13th day of July, 2009, with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system under Local Rule CV-5(a)(3). /s/ Charles Ainsworth Charles Ainsworth CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE Counsel for EMG has conferred with counsel for Defendants Apple, Inc., American Airlines, Inc., Bloomberg, LP, Continental Airlines, Inc., and United Parcel Service, Inc. (collectively, "Defendants") in a good faith attempt to resolve the matters raised in this motion without court intervention. Counsel for Defendants indicated that the motion is unopposed. /s/ Charles Ainsworth Charles Ainsworth 20218317.1 -3-

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?