Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Filing 950

Joint MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages JOINT MOTION TO EXCEED OPPOSITION, REPLY AND SUR-REPLY PAGE LIMITS FOR BRIEFS RELATING TO GO DADDY'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NONINFRINGEMENT BASED ON ITS LICENSE DEFENSE by The Go Daddy Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(McNabnay, Neil)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION Eolas Technologies Incorporated, Plaintiff, v. Adobe Systems Inc., et al. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 6:09-cv-00446-LED (filed Oct. 6, 2009) JOINT MOTION TO EXCEED OPPOSITION, REPLY AND SUR-REPLY PAGE LIMITS FOR BRIEFS RELATING TO GO DADDY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NONINFRINGEMENT BASED ON ITS LICENSE DEFENSE Go-Daddy filed a Motion for Summary Judgment of Noninfringement Based on Its License Defense (“the Go Daddy License Motion”) (Dkt. No. 790) on July 25, some weeks in advance of the summary judgment deadline. At that time, Go-Daddy and other defendants understood the summary-judgment page limits of Local Rule CV-7(a)(3)(A) to apply to each party, not each side, and so understood that the pages in the Go Daddy License Motion would not count against other defendants’ summary-judgment page limits. Upon learning, some weeks later, that the limits might instead be understood to be “per side,” the remaining defendants filed a motion requesting the Court not to count the fourteen pages of Go Daddy’s motion against their page limits, or alternatively, to grant fourteen additional pages for defendants’ motions. (Dkt. No. 878) The Court granted this motion, and added fourteen pages to defendants’ summaryjudgment page limits (Dkt. No. 909). Eolas filed an Opposition to the Go Daddy License Motion on August 16. (Dkt. No. 859). Defendant Go Daddy and Plaintiff Eolas now jointly ask the court to extend plaintiff’s and defendants’ opposition, reply and sur-reply page limits so that the opposition, reply and surreply briefing on the Go Daddy License motion also is not charged against these respective limits. Eolas’ Opposition to the Go Daddy License Motion is 14 pages, the same length as Go Daddy’s Motion. (Dkt. No. 859). Mindful of the Court’s admonition on page limits, Eolas and Go Daddy will keep their respective reply and sur-reply short (no more than nine pages each). DATED: August 29, 2011 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Mike McKool 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 /s/ Neil J. McNabnay Thomas M. Melsheimer (Bar No. 13922550) <txm@fr.com> Neil J. McNabnay (Bar No. 24002583) <njm@fr.com> Carl E. Bruce (Bar No. 24036278) <ceb@fr.com> FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 1717 Main Street, Suite 5000 Dallas, TX 75201 Telephone: (214) 747-5070 Facsimile: (214) 747-2091 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 Proshanto Mukherji (pro hac vice) <pvm@fr.com> FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. One Marina Park Drive Boston, MA 02110-1878 Telephone: (617) 542-5070 Facsimile: (617) 542-8906 Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant The Go Daddy Group, Inc. 2 Robert M. Parker Texas State Bar No. 15498000 Robert Christopher Bunt Texas Bar No. 00787165 Andrew T. Gorham Texas State Bar No. 24012715 PARKER, BUNT & AINSWORTH, P.C. 100 E. Ferguson, Suite 1114 Tyler, Texas 75702 (903) 531-3535 (903) 533-9687- Facsimile rmparker@pbatyler.com rcbunt@pbatyler.com tgorham@pbatyler.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES INC. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify 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) on August 29, 2011. /s/ Proshanto Mukherji Proshanto Mukherji 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?