§

Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP v. Arroware Industries, Inc.

92067494 (T.T.A.B. May. 2, 2019)
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP v. Arroware Industries, Inc.

10 Cited authorities

  1. Safeco of America v. Rawstron

    181 F.R.D. 441 (C.D. Cal. 1998)   Cited 159 times
    Holding interrogatory that seeks facts about multiple requests for admissions should be counted as a separate interrogatory for each request.

  2. Estate of Manship v. United States

    232 F.R.D. 552 (M.D. La. 2005)   Cited 39 times
    Holding that subparts seeking "who, what, when, where and how" information which relates to a common theme constitute a single interrogatory

  3. Susko v. City of Weirton

    Civ. Action No. 5:09-CV-1 (N.D.W. Va. May. 7, 2010)   Cited 12 times
    Finding that plaintiff's objection on the grounds of privilege and work product doctrine was improper because it was not accompanied by a privilege log and ordering plaintiff to produce complete response to discovery requests at issue

  4. Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 26   Cited 96,222 times   664 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37

  5. Rule 37 - Failure to Make Disclosures or to Cooperate in Discovery; Sanctions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 37   Cited 46,415 times   323 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party may be barred from using a witness if it fails to disclose the witness

  6. Rule 34 - Producing Documents, Electronically Stored Information, and Tangible Things, or Entering onto Land, for Inspection and Other Purposes

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 34   Cited 13,267 times   151 Legal Analyses
    Finding that the rules related to electronic discovery were "not meant to create a routine right of direct access to a party's electronic information system, although such access may be justified in some circumstances."

  7. Rule 33 - Interrogatories to Parties

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 33   Cited 10,988 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Rule 30(b)

  8. Rule 36 - Requests for Admission

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 36   Cited 6,145 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Noting that facts admitted pursuant to a Rule 36 discovery request are "conclusively established unless the court, on motion, permits the admission to be withdrawn or amended"

  9. Section 2.120 - Discovery

    37 C.F.R. § 2.120   Cited 22 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Providing that the TTAB "in its discretion, may refuse to consider the additional written disclosures or responses"

  10. Section 2.127 - Motions

    37 C.F.R. § 2.127   Cited 8 times

    (a) Every motion must be submitted in written form and must meet the requirements prescribed in § 2.126 . It shall contain a full statement of the grounds, and shall embody or be accompanied by a brief. Except as provided in paragraph (e)(1) of this section, a brief in response to a motion shall be filed within twenty days from the date of service of the motion unless another time is specified by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or the time is extended by stipulation of the parties approved