throbber
Case 2:15-cv-00576-RWS-RSP Document 29 Filed 08/17/15 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 317
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`AT&T INC., et al.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SPRINT CORPORATION, et al.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`T-MOBILE USA, INC., et al.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`v.
`
`VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,
`et al.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-00576
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-00579
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-00580
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-00581
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO MOVE,
`ANSWER, OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`Page 1
`
`CCE_EXHIBIT 2002
`
`

`

`Case 2:15-cv-00576-RWS-RSP Document 29 Filed 08/17/15 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 318
`
`
`HTC CORPORATION and HTC AMERICA, INC., (collectively, “HTC”), without
`
`
`
`waiving any defenses described or referred to in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12, move the Court to extend the
`
`time within which HTC is required to move, answer, or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s
`
`Amended Complaint. In support of their Motion, HTC states as follows:
`
`1.
`
`On April 30, 2015, Plaintiff filed an Original Complaint naming HTC
`
`Corporation and HTC America Inc. as Defendants alleging infringement of United States Patent
`
`Nos. 8,457,022, 8,571,957 and 8,867,472.
`
`2.
`
`On July 22, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint naming HTC Corporation and
`
`HTC America Inc. as Defendants alleging infringement of United States Patent Nos. 8,457,022,
`
`8,570,957, 8,867,472, 8,457,676, 9,025,590 and 9,078,262.
`
`3.
`
`Counsel for HTC will agree to accept service for HTC in exchange for an
`
`extension of time for HTC to respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint until November 16, 2015. This
`
`extension will make service easier for the parties and eliminate the need for the formalities under
`
`Fed. R. Civ. P. 4.
`
`4.
`
`HTC’s agreement with Plaintiff should not be construed as a waiver of any other
`
`rights or defenses, including, for instance, HTC’s right to file counterclaims, affirmative
`
`defenses, or to otherwise challenge the validity of the subject patents. Plaintiff is unopposed to
`
`the relief sought in this motion.
`
`WHEREFORE, HTC respectfully requests that the time in which HTC is required to
`
`move, answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint for Patent Infringement be extended
`
`to and include November 16, 2015.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`Page 2
`
`

`

`Case 2:15-cv-00576-RWS-RSP Document 29 Filed 08/17/15 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 319
`
`Dated: August 17, 2015
`
`
`
`/s/ Steven A. Moore
`Steven A. Moore
`steve.moore@pillsburylaw.com
`California SBN 232114
`Callie A. Bjurstrom
`callie.bjurstrom@pillsburylaw.com
`California SBN 137816
`Nicole S. Cunningham
`nicole.cunningham@pillsburylaw.com
`California SBN 234390
`Richard W. Thill
`richard.thill@pillsburylaw.com
`California SBN 236409
`PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW
`PITTMAN LLP
`501 West Broadway, Suite 1100
`San Diego, CA 92101-3575
`(619) 234-5000
`(619) 236-1995 (fax)
`
`ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS
`HTC CORPORATION AND HTC AMERICA,
`INC.
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was filed
`
`electronically in compliance with Local Rule CV-5 on this 17th day of August, 2015. As of this
`date all counsel of record have consented to electronic service and are being served with a copy
`of this document through the Court’s CM/ECF system under Local Rule CV-5(a)(3)(A).
`
`/s/ Steven A. Moore
`Steven A. Moore
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`Page 3
`
`

`

`Case 2:15-cv-00576-RWS-RSP Document 29-1 Filed 08/17/15 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 320
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`AT&T INC., et al.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SPRINT CORPORATION, et al.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`T-MOBILE USA, INC., et al.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-00576
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-00579
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-00580
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-00581
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`v.
`
`VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,
`et al.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO MOVE,
`ANSWER, OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Page 4
`
`

`

`Case 2:15-cv-00576-RWS-RSP Document 29-1 Filed 08/17/15 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 321
`
`
`
`
`Before the Court is the unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Move, Answer or
`
`Otherwise Respond to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint as to Defendants HTC Corporation and
`
`HTC America, Inc. submitted by Plaintiff Cellular Communications Equipment LLC and
`
`Defendants HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. (collectively, “HTC”).
`
`
`
`Pursuant to stipulation of the parties, it is hereby ordered that HTCs deadline to move,
`
`answer, or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is extended until November 16,
`
`2015.
`
`
`
`2
`
`Page 5
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket