`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 6:20-cv-00693-ADA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TRILLER, INC.,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`
`BYTEDANCE LTD., BYTEDANCE INC.,
`TIKTOK INC., AND TIKTOK PTE. LTD.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SET THE RESPONSE DATE FOR
`PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Bytedance Ltd., Bytedance Inc., TikTok Inc., and TikTok Pte. Ltd. (collectively,
`
`“Defendants”), without waiving any defenses described or referred to in Federal Rule of Civil
`
`Procedure 12, hereby move to set the time to answer, object to, move, or otherwise respond to
`
`Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint to and including January 8, 2021. This motion is not made
`
`for delay, but only to permit orderly resolution of issues in the case.
`
`On November 19, 2020, Bytedance Ltd. filed a Rule 12(b)(2) Motion to Dismiss for Lack
`
`of Personal Jurisdiction, see ECF No. 29, and Bytedance Ltd. and TikTok Inc. filed a Rule 12(b)(3)
`
`Motion to Dismiss and Transfer and a Motion to Transfer Pursuant to Section 1404, see ECF No.
`
`30. Subsequently, on November 24, 2020, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint adding
`
`Bytedance Inc. and TikTok Pte. Ltd. to the present action. See ECF No. 32.
`
`Counsel for Defendants has met and conferred with counsel for Plaintiff. Counsel for the
`
`original Defendants (Bytedance Ltd. and TikTok Inc.) have agreed to accept service for the two
`
`DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SET RESPONSE DATE TO 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Page 1
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00693-ADA Document 38 Filed 12/08/20 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`new Defendants (Bytedance Inc. and TikTok Pte. Ltd.) and to set a single unified response date of
`
`January 8, 2021, for all Defendants to respond to the First Amended Complaint.
`
`In response to the Court’s email of November 28, 2020, Counsel for Defendants and
`
`Plaintiff request that their Case Readiness Status Report be due on January 11, 2021, which is the
`
`next business day after the proposed unified response date of January 8, 2021.
`
`Accordingly, Defendants respectfully request that the Court grant this motion for an
`
`extension of time and set the response date for all Defendants to January 8, 2021 and a deadline
`
`for the Case Readiness Status Report of January 11, 2021.
`
`A proposed order is submitted herewith.
`
`Dated: December 8, 2020
`
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`
`By: /s/ David M. Hoffman
`
`Frank E. Scherkenbach (pro hac vice)
`Adam J. Kessel (pro hac vice)
`Proshanto Mukherji (pro hac vice)
`One Marina Park Drive
`Boston, MA 02210
`Tel: (617) 542-5070
`Fax: (617) 542-8906
`
`David M. Hoffman
`Texas Bar No. 24046084
`hoffman@fr.com
`111 Congress Avenue, Suite 810
`Austin, TX 78701
`Tel: (512) 472-5070
`Fax: (512) 320-8935
`
`COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS,
`BYTEDANCE LTD., BYTEDANCE INC., TIKTOK
`INC., AND TIKTOK PTE. LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SET RESPONSE DATE TO 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Page 2
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00693-ADA Document 38 Filed 12/08/20 Page 3 of 3
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in
`
`compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a) on December 8, 2020, and was served via CM/ECF on all
`
`counsel who are deemed to have consented to electronic service. Local Rule CV-5(b)(1).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ David M. Hoffman
`David M. Hoffman
`
`DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SET RESPONSE DATE TO 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Page 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
