§Why CasetextPricing

Coho Licensing LLC v. Linkedin Corporation

MOTION to Consolidate Cases / Motion to Consolidate Related Cases Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 42

9 Cited authorities

  1. Huene v. United States

    743 F.2d 703 (9th Cir. 1984)   Cited 288 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where judgment resolves only one of several consolidated cases, appeal is proper upon certification pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b)

  2. Sandisk Corp. v. Phison Electronics Corp.

    538 F. Supp. 2d 1060 (W.D. Wis. 2008)   Cited 17 times
    Staying complex patent case in favor of International Trade Commission proceedings involving overlapping discovery and factual and legal disputes

  3. Abbott Diabetes Care, Inc. v. Dexcom, Inc.

    C.A. No. 06-514 GMS (D. Del. Sep. 30, 2007)   Cited 15 times
    Finding that a stay pending PTO reexamination was warranted “where the court has not yet conducted a Rule 16(b) scheduling conference, no scheduling Order is in place, no discovery has taken place, and little time has yet to be invested in the litigation”

  4. Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. TiVo, Inc.

    CAUSE NO. 5:11-CV-53-JRG (E.D. Tex. Jul. 18, 2012)

    CAUSE NO. 5:11-CV-53-JRG 07-18-2012 MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC. ET AL. Plaintiffs, v. TIVO, INC., ET AL. Defendants. RODNEY GILSTRAP MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Counterclaim Defendants Time Warner Cable Inc. and Time Warner Cable LLC's (collectively, "TWC") Motion to Sever and Stay Tivo's Claims Against Time Warner Cable (Dkt. No. 110). The Court, having considered both the parties' briefing and oral arguments, finds that the motion should be GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART as

  5. Kohus v. Toys "R" US, Inc.

    Case Nos. C-1-05-517, C-1-05-671 (S.D. Ohio May. 25, 2006)   Cited 1 times

    Case Nos. C-1-05-517, C-1-05-671. May 25, 2006 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES FOR DISCOVERY AND MARKMAN HEARING AND DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STAY MARKMAN DEADLINES SUSAN DLOTT, District Judge This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Louis M. Kohus's Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Markman Hearing and Discovery (doc. #17); Defendants' (Joint) Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion (doc. # 18); and Defendants' Agreed Motion to Stay Markman Deadlines (doc. # 20). For

  6. 3M Company 3M Innovative Prop. v. Moldex-Metric

    CIVIL NO. 06-4044 (MJD/AJB) (D. Minn. Dec. 21, 2006)

    CIVIL NO. 06-4044 (MJD/AJB). December 21, 2006 ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE MICHAEL DAVIS, District Judge Based on this Court's review of the record, the Court AFFIRMS Magistrate Judge Boylan's Report and Recommendation dated December 1, 2006. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Magistrate Judge Boylan's Report and Recommendation dated December 1, 2006 is ADOPTED; and 2. Defendant's Motion to Consolidate [Docket No. 11] is GRANTED.

  7. Haga v. Heatcraft Inc.

    10 F. Supp. 2d 1027 (C.D. Ill. 1998)   Cited 1 times

    No. 96-CV-2173. July 22, 1998. Kenneth W. Blan, Jr., Blan Law Offices, Danville, IL, for Plaintiff. Elizabeth A. Knight, Patrick J. Fanning, Edward R. Tomkowiak, Knight, Hoppe, Fanning Knight, Ltd., Des Plaines, IL, for Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER McCUSKEY, District Judge. Plaintiff, Charles W. Haga, filed a two-count complaint against Defendant, Heatcraft Inc. In count I, Plaintiff alleged that Defendant violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ( 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.)

  8. Rule 1 - Scope and Purpose

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 1   Cited 15,441 times   49 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"

  9. Rule 42 - Consolidation; Separate Trials

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 42   Cited 9,422 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Granting court's authority to consolidate related cases or "issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay."