`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`Civil Action No. 16-453-RGA
`
`ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`ELECTRONIC ARTS, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Civil Action No. 16-454-RGA
`
`V.
`
`Civil Action No. 16-455-RGA
`
`TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE
`SOFTWARE, INC., et al.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`ORDER
`
`The parties dispute whether Plaintiff can assert different claims than the claims it
`
`previously asserted. (E.g., No. 16-453 (D.I. 113 & 115)). The use of"preliminary" in my orders
`
`refers to the larger group from which the "final" and smaller group is to be drawn. (E.g., No. 15-
`
`
`
`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 86 Filed 04/13/17 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 2614
`
`228, D.I. 34, ~l O; No. 16-453, D.I. 62, ~ 9). "Preliminary" refers to time. It does not mean
`
`"subject to change at whim." As Defendants point out, the goal is to narrow the case into
`
`something that could be triable. When one side or the other seeks to replaces newly-identified
`
`weaklings with more robust claims, that side is going in the wrong direction. Absent good cause,
`
`Plaintiff cannot substitute different claims for the ones currently asserted, and Defendants cannot
`
`substitute different art for the ones currently asserted.
`
`Neither side's letter really addresses good cause. I do not see good cause in what Plaintiff
`
`states in its letter. I have not, however, given Plaintiff a fair shot at making its argument under
`
`what I believe is the appropriate standard. Thus, while Plaintiff is not permitted to substitute on
`
`this record, I make this ruling without prejudice to Plaintiff seeking, now or at a later time, to
`
`demonstrate good cause.
`IT IS SO ORDERED this l~ day of April 2017.
`
`
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
