Apple and Google request for more time to file in two separate court cases
Apple and Google subsidiary Motorola this week have asked for more time to file their respective contentions in a pair of cases, one an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and another for litigation in Florida.
In the federal appeals case, Apple and Google's Motorola Mobility filed a joint request asking the CAFC to tack on 60 days to the deadline to file initial arguments. Both parties are appealing a previous July ruling from Judge Richard Posner, dismissing a two-way lawsuit that has been in litigation since 2010.
As noted by FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller, Apple's current deadline to file is Sept. 28, with Motorola's response due 40 days later on Nov. 7, however the parties say "the complexity of this case and the press of other matters" warrants an extension. At issue is Judge Posner's dismissal of a variety of inunction requests, but also a number of summary judgment orders and the denial of a jury trial regarding damages incurred.
From the joint motion:
As for Motorola's suit against Apple in Florida, both parties filed a stipulation on Tuesday requesting a two-month deadline extension for their mutual infringement and invalidity contentions, due Sept. 7 and Oct. 5, respectively. Mueller said the request was made to accommodate for an assessment of new products being launched by both companies, with Motorola wanting to add new contentions for devices that won't be released by the original deadlines. Both Apple and Motorola are expected to be debuting a variety of devices in the coming weeks, including Apple's much-awaited next-generation iPhone which is likely to be unveiled on Sept. 12.
Presiding Judge Robert Scola granted the stipulation on Wednesday, taking note of Motorola's previous statements regarding case scheduling.
In the federal appeals case, Apple and Google's Motorola Mobility filed a joint request asking the CAFC to tack on 60 days to the deadline to file initial arguments. Both parties are appealing a previous July ruling from Judge Richard Posner, dismissing a two-way lawsuit that has been in litigation since 2010.
As noted by FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller, Apple's current deadline to file is Sept. 28, with Motorola's response due 40 days later on Nov. 7, however the parties say "the complexity of this case and the press of other matters" warrants an extension. At issue is Judge Posner's dismissal of a variety of inunction requests, but also a number of summary judgment orders and the denial of a jury trial regarding damages incurred.
From the joint motion:
There are over 1000 entries on the district court docket, the parties filed over 125 motions and applications to the court, the district court issued 107 orders, and the record contains over 8.5 gigabytes of pleadings and over 72.4 gigabytes of expert reports and supporting materials.
As for Motorola's suit against Apple in Florida, both parties filed a stipulation on Tuesday requesting a two-month deadline extension for their mutual infringement and invalidity contentions, due Sept. 7 and Oct. 5, respectively. Mueller said the request was made to accommodate for an assessment of new products being launched by both companies, with Motorola wanting to add new contentions for devices that won't be released by the original deadlines. Both Apple and Motorola are expected to be debuting a variety of devices in the coming weeks, including Apple's much-awaited next-generation iPhone which is likely to be unveiled on Sept. 12.
Presiding Judge Robert Scola granted the stipulation on Wednesday, taking note of Motorola's previous statements regarding case scheduling.
Infringement contentions are now due by Nov. 7, while invalidity contentions must be in by Dec. 5.The parties indicate that they have agreed to extend the deadlines to exchange infringement and invalidity contentions. Motorola, who so vehemently protested the longer schedule advanced by Apple and adopted by the Court, now (without a hint of irony) joins in a request to further extend deadlines. The Court is nonetheless pleased that the parties have been able to reach agreement on something. Therefore, in the spirit of rewarding the parties? efforts to confer and reach agreement, the Court finds good cause for the requested extension and hereby grants the same.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Great. Just great. As these guys keep piling on motions, appeals, applications, and who knows what, this case will soon get to the point where no judge, let alone a jury, will be able to figure it out. No wonder Judge Posner threw one case out. Well done, sir, and I say a pox on both Apple and Google/Motorola. Seems like an extreme case of lawyers gone wild.
Quote:
Originally Posted by waybacmac
No wonder Judge Posner threw one case out. Well done, sir, and I say a pox on both Apple and Google/Motorola. Seems like an extreme case of lawyers gone wild.
Posner's senile laziness and cavalier dismissal of the earlier case based on his political agenda and personal opinion that organic chemistry is the only career worthy of being protected by patents, is the whole reason for the complexity of this appeal in the first place.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/07/why-there-are-too-many-patents-in-america/259725/
Quote:
Originally Posted by waybacmac
Great. Just great. As these guys keep piling on motions, appeals, applications, and who knows what, this case will soon get to the point where no judge, let alone a jury, will be able to figure it out. No wonder Judge Posner threw one case out. Well done, sir, and I say a pox on both Apple and Google/Motorola. Seems like an extreme case of lawyers gone wild.
Why do you even care?
All you really need to worry about is your next iPhone/iPad/Mac, etc.
This is what companies do. IP disputes happen all the time. You're reading about the ones happening between consumer tech companies in particular because that's what you happen to be interested in.