`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-693-ADA
`
`TRILLER, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BYTEDANCE LTD., BYTEDANCE INC.,
`TIKTOK INC., and TIKTOK PTE. LTD.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITS
`
`Defendants ByteDance Ltd. (“BDL”), ByteDance Inc. (“BDI”), TikTok Inc. (“TTI”), and
`
`TikTok Pte. Ltd. (“TTPL”) respectfully request that the Court allow Defendants to exceed the page
`
`limit with regard to Defendants’ Reply in Support of Their Motion to Transfer Pursuant to Section
`
`1404, and in support would respectfully show the Court as follows:
`
`Defendants seek leave to exceed the 5-page limit for replies in support of motions to
`
`transfer provided in the Court’s Order Governing Proceedings – Patent Case (February 23, 2021).
`
`Specifically, with regards to the reply brief, Defendants seek leave to exceed the page limit by
`
`three pages, for a total length not to exceed eight pages, in order to provide the Court with a
`
`complete discussion of the factual and legal issues and respond fully to thet arguments and
`
`evidence presented by Plaintiff Triller, Inc.’s opposition brief.
`
`Defendants have conferred with Plaintiff, who does not oppose this motion.
`
`For the reasons stated above, Defendants respectfully request that this Court allow
`
`Defendants leave to file Defendants’ Reply in Support of Their Motion to Transfer Pursuant to
`
`Section 1404 in excess of the page limit.
`
`A proposed order is submitted herewith.
`
`DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITS
`
`Page 1
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00693-ADA Document 67 Filed 06/01/21 Page 2 of 4
`
`
`
`Dated: June 1, 2021
`
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`
`By: /s/ David M. Hoffman
`
`Frank E. Scherkenbach (pro hac vice)
`scherkenbach@fr.com
`Adam J. Kessel (pro hac vice)
`kessel@fr.com
`Proshanto Mukherji (pro hac vice)
`mukherji@fr.com
`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
`
`Michael R. Headley (pro hac vice)
`headley@fr.com
`500 Arguello Street, Suite 500
`Redwood City, CA 94063
`Tel: (650) 839-5070
`Fax: (650) 839-5071
`
`COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS,
`BYTEDANCE LTD., BYTEDANCE INC., TIKTOK
`INC., AND TIKTOK PTE. LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITS
`
`Page 2
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00693-ADA Document 67 Filed 06/01/21 Page 3 of 4
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
`
`On May 27, 2021, counsel for Defendants contacted counsel for Plaintiff regarding the
`
`relief sought in this motion, and Plaintiff does not oppose this Motion for Leave to Exceed Page
`
`Limits.
`
`By: /s/ David M. Hoffman
`
`David M. Hoffman
`
`
`DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITS
`
`Page 3
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-00693-ADA Document 67 Filed 06/01/21 Page 4 of 4
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in
`
`compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a) on June 1, 2021, 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 FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITS
`
`Page 4
`
`
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
