`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
`WESTERN DIVISION
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,
`
`v.
`
`APPLE INC.,
`
`Defendant/Counterclaimant.
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`
`Case No. No. 2:12-cv-02831-JPM tmp
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`
`PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ORAL ARGUMENT, MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT,
`AND CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTATION
`
`MOTION
`
`Plaintiff B.E. Technology L.L.C. (“B.E.”) moves this Honorable Court to allow oral
`
`argument at a hearing on defendant Apple Inc.’s (“Apple”) Motion to Transfer Venue Pursuant
`
`to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Concurrently herewith, B.E. requests that the Court also permit oral
`
`argument on the nearly identical transfer motions filed by Google, Inc. (“Google”), Amazon
`
`Digital Services, Inc. (“Amazon”), LinkedIn, Inc. (“LinkedIn”), Groupon, Inc. (“Groupon”),
`
`Pandora Media, Inc. (“Pandora”), Twitter, Inc. (“Twitter”), Barnes & Noble, Inc. (“Barnes &
`
`Noble”), Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (“STA”), Samsung Electronics America,
`
`Inc. (“SEA”), Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC (“SCEA”), Sony Mobile
`
`Communications (USA) Inc. (“SMC”), Sony Electronics, Inc. (“SEI”), Microsoft Corp.
`
`(“Microsoft”), Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”), Spark Networks, Inc. (“Spark”), People Media, Inc.
`
`(“People Media”), Match.com L.L.C. (“Match”), and Motorola Mobility Holdings LLC
`
`(“Motorola”) (collectively with Apple, the “B.E. defendants”). A hearing on these motions will
`
`
`
`Case 2:12-cv-02831-JPM-tmp Document 43 Filed 03/18/13 Page 2 of 3 PageID 748
`
`(a) enable B.E. adequately to respond to the arguments and evidence presented by the B.E.
`
`defendants’ reply memoranda, and (b) provide the Court a forum to ask any questions it may
`
`have before deciding these important motions.
`
`MEMORANDUM
`
`The arguments in favor of conducting a hearing on the B.E. defendant’s motions to
`
`transfer are set forth in the memorandum supporting the motion for oral argument filed in B.E.
`
`Technology L.L.C. v. Google, Inc., Case No. 2:12-cv-02830 JPM tmp. B.E. hereby incorporates
`
`by reference that document to avoid repeating duplicative information.
`
`CERTIFICATE OF CONSULATION
`
`Richard M. Carter, counsel for B.E., consulted telephonically with counsel for Apple,
`
`Mark Vorder-Bruegge, who stated that Apple did not consent but would not oppose this motion
`
`for oral argument so long as B.E.’s motion does not seek a hearing at which testimony would be
`
`taken or exhibits would be offered and provided that B.E. did not ask for specific allocations or
`
`limitations of time per party. B.E. makes no request as to the format and structure of any
`
`hearing.
`
`
`
`Dated: March 18, 2013
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`s/Daniel J. Weinberg
`Robert E. Freitas (CA Bar No. 80948)
`Craig R. Kaufman (CA Bar No. 159458)
`Daniel J. Weinberg (CA Bar No. 227159)
`James Lin (CA Bar No. 241472)
`Qudus B. Olaniran (CA Bar No. 267838)
`FREITAS TSENG & KAUFMAN LLP
`100 Marine Parkway, Suite 200
`Redwood Shores, CA 94065
`Telephone: (650) 593-6300
`Facsimile: (650) 593-6301
`rfreitas@ftklaw.com
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`Case 2:12-cv-02831-JPM-tmp Document 43 Filed 03/18/13 Page 3 of 3 PageID 749
`
`ckaufman@ftklaw.com
`dweinberg@ftklaw.com
`jlin@ftklaw.com
`qolaniran@ftklaw.com
`
`
`Richard M. Carter (TN B.P.R. #7285)
`Adam C. Simpson (TN B.P.R. #24705)
`MARTIN, TATE, MORROW & MARSTON, P.C.
`6410 Poplar Avenue, Suite 1000
`Memphis, TN 38119-4839
`Telephone: (901) 522-9000
`Facsimile: (901) 527-3746
`rcarter@martintate.com
`asimpson@martintate.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff B.E. Technology, L.L.C.
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that on March 18, 2013 a true and correct copy of the
`foregoing was electronically filed with the United States District Court for the Western District
`of Tennessee and was served on counsel by the Court’s electronic filing notification.
`
`
`
`s/Daniel J. Weinberg
` Daniel J. Weinberg
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 3 -
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
