Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Filing 715

Unopposed MOTION to Expedite EOLAS' MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF SOURCE CODE FROM EBAY INC. AND AMAZON.COM, INC. by Eolas Technologies Incorporated. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(McKool, Mike)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION Eolas Technologies Incorporated, Plaintiff, vs. Adobe Systems Inc., Amazon.com, Inc., Apple Inc., Argosy Publishing, Inc., Blockbuster Inc., CDW Corp., Citigroup Inc., eBay Inc., Frito-Lay, Inc., The Go Daddy Group, Inc., Google Inc., J.C. Penney Company, Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., New Frontier Media, Inc., Office Depot, Inc., Perot Systems Corp., Playboy Enterprises International, Inc., Rent-A-Center, Inc., Staples, Inc., Sun Microsystems Inc., Texas Instruments Inc., Yahoo! Inc., and YouTube, LLC Defendants. § § § Civil Action No. 6:09-CV-00446-LED § § § § JURY TRIAL § § § § § § § § § § § § § EOLAS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING ON EOLAS’ MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF SOURCE CODE FROM EBAY INC. AND AMAZON.COM, INC. On June 20, 2011, Plaintiff Eolas Technologies Incorporated (“Eolas”) filed its Motion to Compel Discovery from eBay and Amazon regarding the production of source code for their accused websites. As mentioned in the motion, eBay and Amazon are represented by common counsel. Given the importance of the production of source code to the upcoming expert report deadline, and because the Court is already scheduled to hear oral argument on Eolas’ Motion to Motion to Compel Designation of 30(b)(6) Witnesses from Amazon (Dkt. 667) on June 29, 2011 (see Order at dkt. 694), Eolas requests that the Court issue an expedited briefing schedule on this motion and address the motion on an expedited basis so that the matter may be heard at the June Austin 68121v1 29, 2011 hearing.1 Eolas requests that the Court set an expedited briefing schedule. Defendant’s opposition brief due: Friday, June 24, 2011. Eolas’ reply brief due: Monday, June 27, 2011. WHEREFORE, Eolas therefore requests the Court grant the expedited briefing schedule as outlined above and in the attached Order. DATED: June 20, 2011 Respectfully submitted, McKOOL SMITH P.C. By: 1 /s/ Mike McKool Counsel for eBay and Amazon indicated that they are not opposed to expedited briefing and agree to having this issue addressed at the hearing on June 29, 2011. Austin 68121v1 Mike McKool Lead Attorney Texas State Bar No. 13732100 mmckool@mckoolsmith.com Douglas Cawley Texas State Bar No. 04035500 dcawley@mckoolsmith.com MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. 300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500 Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone: (214) 978-4000 Telecopier: (214) 978-4044 Kevin L. Burgess Texas State Bar No. 24006927 kburgess@mckoolsmith.com John B. Campbell Texas State Bar No. 24036314 jcampbell@mckoolsmith.com Josh W. Budwin Texas State Bar No. 24050347 jbudwin@mckoolsmith.com Gretchen K. Harting Texas State Bar No. 24055979 gharting@mckoolsmith.com Matthew B. Rappaport Texas State Bar No. 24070472 mrappaport@mckoolsmith.com MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. 300 West Sixth Street, Suite 1700 Austin, Texas 78701 Telephone: (512) 692-8700 Telecopier: (512) 692-8744 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES INC. CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE Counsel for Plaintiff conferred with Counsel for Defendants regarding the relief requested in this motion on June 17, 2011. Counsel for Defendant stated that Defendant does not oppose an expedited briefing schedule and does not oppose having this motion addressed at the June 29 hearing. /s/ Josh W. Budwin____ Austin 68121v1 Josh W. Budwin CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a). As such, this document was served on all counsel who have consented to electronic services on June 20, 2011. Local Rule CV-5(a))3)(A). /s/ Josh W. Budwin____ Josh W. Budwin Austin 68121v1

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?