§Why CasetextPricing

Mondis Technology Ltd v. Top Victory Electronics (Taiwan) Co. Ltd. et al

MOTION to Amend/Correct Supplement Infringement Contentions Pursuant to Patent Rule 3-6

7 Cited authorities

  1. SW Enterprises v. Southtrust Bank of Alabama

    315 F.3d 533 (5th Cir. 2003)   Cited 1,388 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b) governs the amendment of pleadings after a scheduling order deadline has expired and only upon a showing of good cause and with the judge's consent will the more liberal standard of Rule 15 apply to the court's decision to grant or deny leave

  2. Arbitron, Inc. v. International Demographics Inc.

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-CV-434 (TJW) (E.D. Tex. Jan. 16, 2009)   Cited 6 times

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-CV-434 (TJW). January 16, 2009 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER T. WARD, District Judge Pending before the Court is plaintiff Arbitron, Inc.'s ("Arbitron") Motion to Amend its Infringement Contentions (Docket Entry No. 85) and related briefing. Arbitron requests leave of the Court to amend its initial P.R. 3-1 Infringement Contentions to include allegation of an infringing offer for sale. Defendant IPSOS America, Inc.'s ("Ipsos") opposes the motion. In light of the arguments made

  3. Garmin Ltd. v. Tomtom, Inc.

    CASE NO. 2:06-CV-338 (LED), JURY TRIAL DEMANDED (E.D. Tex. Oct. 3, 2007)   Cited 7 times

    CASE NO. 2:06-CV-338 (LED), JURY TRIAL DEMANDED. October 3, 2007 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER LEONARD DAVIS, District Judge Before the Court are Defendant TomTom, Inc.'s ("TomTom") Motion for Leave to Add Garmin International, Inc. (Docket No. 45), Plaintiff Garmin Ltd.'s ("Garmin") Motion to Dismiss TomTom's Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Counterclaims and to Strike TomTom's Fifth Affirmative Defense (Docket No. 62), Garmin's Motion for Protective Order on Topics 1-3 of TomTom's First 30(b)(6) Notice

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

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 37   Cited 46,648 times   324 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party may be barred from using a witness if it fails to disclose the witness

  5. Rule 16 - Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 16   Cited 34,376 times   52 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the sanctions authorized by Rule 37(b)

  6. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 22,480 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

  7. Section 1.530 - Statement by patent owner in ex parte reexamination; amendment by patent owner in ex parte or inter partes reexamination; inventorship change in ex parte or inter partes reexamination

    37 C.F.R. § 1.530   Cited 6 times

    (a) Except as provided in § 1.510(e) , no statement or other response by the patent owner in an ex parte reexamination proceeding shall be filed prior to the determinations made in accordance with § 1.515 or § 1.520 . If a premature statement or other response is filed by the patent owner, it will not be acknowledged or considered in making the determination, and it will be returned or discarded (at the Office's option). (b) The order for ex parte reexamination will set a period of not less than