American Patents LLC v. Mediatek, Inc. et al

Western District of Texas, txwd-6:2018-cv-00339

Opposed MOTION for Leave to File American Patents' SUR-REPLY to Lenovo's Motion to Sever and Stay by American Patents LLC.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION AMERICAN PATENTS LLC, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:18-CV-339-ADA v. PATENT CASE MEDIATEK INC., et al., JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants. PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY Pursuant to Local Rule CV-7(f)(1), Plaintiff American Patents respectfully requests leave to file a Sur-Reply to Defendants Lenovo (Shanghai) Electronics Technology Co., Ltd. and Lenovo Group Ltd.'s Motion to Sever and Stay Pursuant to the Customer-Suit Exception Doctrine (Dkt. 82). In its Reply (Dkt. 90), Lenovo significantly changed its position from its motion about agreeing to be bound by certain aspects of any ruling against the co-defendant chip makers who supply it. A sur-reply is necessary at least to show why, under applicable case law, Lenovo's changed position is inadequate to warrant a customer stay. Pursuant to Local Rule CV-7 (b), Plaintiff files its proposed Sur-Reply as Exhibit A to this motion for leave. A proposed order is attached. Counsel for American Patents has conferred with counsel for Lenovo, and Lenovo is opposed to the relief sought in this motion. Lenovo says it opposes the motion because American Patents allegedly knew before the opposition brief that Lenovo was willing to be bound in some limited respects. But Lenovo ignores that it would not agree to be bound in any respect during the parties' original meet and confer on the motion, and that it did not in fact 1 agree to be bound in its motion brief. That paper was what the opposition had to respond to. Despite the parties' discussions after the motion about a possible stipulation, Lenovo made no concrete, formal statement of the extent it would be bound until its Reply brief. Finally, and most important, even that new stipulation by Lenovo is inadequate to justify a stay—as the sur- reply demonstrates. Dated: April 18, 2019 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Michael D. Ellis Matthew J. Antonelli (admission pending) Texas Bar No. 24068432 matt@ahtlawfirm.com Zachariah S. Harrington (admission pending) Texas Bar No. 24057886 zac@ahtlawfirm.com Larry D. Thompson, Jr. (admission pending) Texas Bar No. 24051428 larry@ahtlawfirm.com Christopher Ryan Pinckney (admission pending) Texas Bar No. 24067819 ryan@ahtlawfirm.com Michael D. Ellis Texas Bar No. 24081586 michael@ahtlawfirm.com ANTONELLI, HARRINGTON & THOMPSON LLP 4306 Yoakum Blvd., Ste. 450 Houston, TX 77006 (713) 581-3000 Stafford Davis State Bar No. 24054605 sdavis@stafforddavisfirm.com Catherine Bartles Texas Bar No. 24104849 cbartles@stafforddavisfirm.com THE STAFFORD DAVIS FIRM The People's Petroleum Building 102 North College Avenue, 13th Floor Tyler, Texas 75702 (903) 593-7000 2 (903) 705-7369 fax Attorneys for American Patents LLC 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION AMERICAN PATENTS LLC, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:18-CV-339-ADA v. PATENT CASE MEDIATEK INC., et al., JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY After having considered Plaintiff's Opposed Motion for Leave to File a Sur-Reply to Defendants Lenovo (Shanghai) Electronics Technology Co., Ltd. and Lenovo Group Ltd.'s Motion to Sever and Stay Pursuant to the Customer-Suit Exception Doctrine (Dkt. 82), the Court hereby ORDERS that such motion be, and hereby is, GRANTED. SIGNED this ___ day of ______________, 2019. ____________________________________ ALAN D. ALBRIGHT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1