15 Cited authorities

  1. SW Enterprises v. Southtrust Bank of Alabama

    315 F.3d 533 (5th Cir. 2003)   Cited 1,346 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Rule 16(b) governs leave to amend after a scheduling order deadline has expired and requires movant to demonstrate “good cause” before addressing the issue under the more liberal standard of Rule 15
  2. O2 Micro Intern. v. Monolithic Power Sys

    467 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2006)   Cited 603 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that diligence must be considered in determining whether good cause exists to amend infringement contentions
  3. In re Katz Interactive Call Proc. Patent

    639 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2011)   Cited 280 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it is "not necessary to disclose more structure than the general purpose processor that performs those functions" because such functions are "coextensive with the structure disclosed."
  4. Reliance Insurance v. The Louisiana Land & Exploration Co.

    110 F.3d 253 (5th Cir. 1997)   Cited 405 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding no abuse of discretion when the plaintiff “offered no justification for its delay”
  5. Computer Acceleration Corp. v. Microsoft Corp.

    503 F. Supp. 2d 819 (E.D. Tex. 2007)   Cited 59 times
    Holding the differences between the two classes of products for which plaintiff attempts to rely on one infringement chart "weighs heavily in favor of striking the infringement contentions" against the product for which no chart is offered
  6. Masimo Corp. v. Philips Elecs. N. Am. Corp.

    918 F. Supp. 2d 277 (D. Del. 2013)   Cited 16 times
    Rejecting argument that In re Katz recognized duplication as the only ground supporting narrowing of claims
  7. RichTek Tech. Corp. v. UPI Semiconductor Corp.

    No. C 09-05659 WHA (N.D. Cal. Apr. 29, 2016)   Cited 3 times

    No. C 09-05659 WHA 04-29-2016 RICHTEK TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. uPI SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION, MAXCHIP ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, POWERCHIP TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, SILICON XTAL, AMANDA DAI, and JACKY LEE, Defendants. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO AMEND INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS INTRODUCTION In this patent infringement action, after a series of mandatory stays lasting seven years was finally lifted, plaintiff seeks leave to

  8. CyWee Grp. Ltd. v. Apple Inc.

    Case No.14-cv-01853-HSG (HRL) (N.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2016)   Cited 2 times
    Denying a patentee's motion to amend where the allegedly "new" information was in the patentee's possession for years; while the information "may have been difficult to find—obscured by language barriers and placed at a remove by geography," the court was not "persuaded that these challenges could not have been overcome by a diligent search at or before the outset of this litigation"
  9. Veolia Water Solutions & Techs. N. Am., Inc. v. Aquatech Int'l Corp.

    123 F. Supp. 3d 695 (W.D. Pa. 2015)   Cited 3 times
    Finding bad faith sufficiently alleged where company "conducted no investigation, analysis, or review prior to sending" demand letter and emails showed knowledge that process could not infringe subject patent
  10. Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc.

    No. C 09-5235 MMC (MEJ) (N.D. Cal. Aug. 27, 2013)   Cited 4 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding two-month delay without any reasonable basis not diligent
  11. Rule 16 - Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 16   Cited 33,542 times   51 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the sanctions authorized by Rule 37(b)
  12. Rule 1 - Scope and Purpose

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 1   Cited 14,959 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"