`Case 1:12—cv—OO398—GMS Document 13 Filed 12/17/12 Page 1 of 3 Page|D #: 91
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`HUMANEYES TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
`
`Plaintiff
`
`v.
`
`CA. No. 12-398—GMS
`
`SONY CORPORATION, SONY
`CORPORATION OF AMERICA, SONY
`
`ELECTRONICS INC., SONY MOBILE
`COMMUNICATIONS AB, AND SONY
`
`MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS (USA)
`
`INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF HUMANEYES TECHNOLOGIES
`
`LTD.’S MOTION TO LIFT STAY AND SET A SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
`
`Defendants Sony Corporation, Sony Corporation of America, Sony Electronics Inc., Sony
`
`Mobile Communications AB, and Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc. (collectively
`
`“Sony” or “Defendants”) respectfully submit this response to Plaintiff HumanEyes Technologies
`
`Ltd.’s (“HumanEyes” or “Plaintiff’) Motion to Lift Stay and Set a Scheduling Conference (D.I.
`
`12).
`
`On May 16, 2012, the Court stayed this action pending resolution in ITC Investigation
`
`No. 337-TA—842. D.I. 10. Prior to the end of fact discovery and before any expert discovery or
`
`adjudication of any issues on the merits in that investigation, HumanEyes notified Sony that it
`
`intended to move to voluntarily dismiss the ITC complaint. The parties notified this Court of the
`
`termination of the ITC investigation on November 21, 2012 (D.I. 1 1), and HumanEyes thereafter
`
`moved to lift the stay and request a Rule 16 scheduling conference.
`
`RLFI 773762lv.l
`
`
`
`Case 1:12—cv—0O398—GMS Document 13 Filed 12/17/12 Page 2 of 3 Page|D #: 92
`Case 1:12-cv-00398-GMS Document 13 Filed 12/17/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 92
`
`Sony does not oppose the lifting of the stay in this action. However, to the extent that
`
`Plaintiffs request for a Rule 16 scheduling conference imposes a burden on this Court and
`
`requires it to deviate from its normal scheduling practices, Sony does not join in that request. As
`
`to the length of discovery and timing of trial, Sony will address these issues in the Joint Status
`
`Report prior to the Rule 16 scheduling conference.
`
`As Sony has not yet responded to the complaint in this action, Sony respectfully requests
`
`that Sony’s response to the complaint in this action be due within 30 days of the date that the
`
`Court lifts the stay.
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`John Flock
`Mark A. Chapman
`Michelle Carniaux
`Sheila Mortazavi
`Iuliana Tanase
`Vincent Rubino
`Ajita Shukla
`Michael Sander
`KENYON & KENYON LLP
`One Broadway
`New York, New York 10004-1050
`(212) 425-7200
`
`Dated: December 17, 2012
`
`/S/ Elizabeth R. He
`
`Chad M. Shandler (#3796)
`Elizabeth R. He (#5345)
`RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGER, P.A.
`
`One Rodney Square
`920 N. King Street
`Wilmington , DE 19801
`(302) 651-7700
`Shandler@r1f.com
`He@rlf.co1n
`
`Attorneys for Defendants Sony
`Corporation, Sony Corporation ofAmerica,
`Sony Electronics Inc, Sony Mobile
`Communications AB, Sony Mobile
`Communications (USA) Inc.
`
`RLFI 773'/'62lv.l
`
`
`
`Case 1:12-cv-00398-GMS Document 13 Filed 12/17/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 93
`Case 1:12—cv—OO398—GMS Document 13 Filed 12/17/12 Page 3 of 3 Page|D #: 93
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on December 17, 2012, I caused to be filed the foregoing
`
`document with the Clerk of Court using CMKEZCF, which will send notification of such filing to
`
`counsel of record, and served true and correct copies of the foregoing on the following counsel
`
`as indicated:
`
`BY ELECTRONIC MAIL
`
`Steven J. Balick
`
`Andrew Colin Mayo
`Tiffany Geyer Lydon
`Ashby & Geddes
`500 Delaware Avenue, 8th Floor
`P.O. Box 1150
`
`Wilmington, DE 19899
`sbalick@ashby—geddes.eom
`an1ayo@ashby-geddes.com
`tlydon@ashby-geddes.con1
`
`Matthew D. Powers
`
`Steven S. Cherensky
`Paul T. Ehrlich
`
`Stefani C. Smith
`
`Robert L. Gerrity
`TENSEGRITY LAW GROUP LLP
`
`555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 360
`Redwood Shores, CA 94065
`matthew.powers@tensegritylawgroup.com
`Steven.cherensky@tensegritylawgroup.com
`paul.ehrlich@tensegritylawgroup.corn
`stefani.s1nith@tensegritylawgroup.com
`robert.gerrity@tensegritylawgroup.corn
`
`/s/ Elizabeth R. He
`
`Elizabeth R. He (#5345)
`he@rlf.com
`
`RLFI 7737621 V.l
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
