`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No.: 6:20-cv-1214
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`PATENT CASE
`
`
`Ocean Semiconductor LLC,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`Silicon Laboratories Inc.,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNOPPOSED MOTION BY PLAINTIFF OCEAN SEMICONDUCTOR LLC’S FOR
`LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT SILICON
`LABORATORIES INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Alex Chan
`Timothy Devlin
`tdevlin@devlinlawfirm.com
`Henrik D. Parker
`hparker@devlinlawfirm.com
`Alex Chan (State Bar No. 24108051)
`achan@devlinlawfirm.com
`DEVLIN LAW FIRM LLC
`1526 Gilpin Avenue
`Wilmington, Delaware 19806
`Telephone: (302) 449-9010
`Facsimile: (302) 353-4251
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DATED: April 8, 2021
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-01214-ADA Document 18 Filed 04/08/21 Page 2 of 4
`
`In this patent infringement case, Plaintiff Ocean Semiconductor LLC (“Ocean” or
`
`“Plaintiff”) filed its complaint (Dkt. 1) (the “Complaint”) against Defendant Silicon Laboratories
`
`Inc. (“Silicon Labs” or “Defendant”). In lieu of an answer, Silicon Labs filed a Motion to
`
`Dismiss the Complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) with a supporting brief. (Dkt. 14, the
`
`“Motion.”) On March 25, 2021, Ocean filed a responsive brief in opposition (Dkt. 16) and on
`
`April 1, 2021, Silicon Labs filed a reply brief (Dkt. 17).
`
`Ocean hereby moves this Court, pursuant to Local Rule CV-7(f)(1), for permission to file
`
`a sur-reply brief for the following reasons.
`
`In its Reply, Silicon Labs asserts new arguments and cites new legal authority not
`
`presented in their original opening brief which present an inaccurate description of the
`
`Complaint and the applicable cases interpreting the pleading standard for direct and indirect
`
`infringement. In particular, Silicon Lab’s new arguments are directed to challenging Ocean’s
`
`claims in the Complaint regarding induced infringement and direct infringement under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 271(g), and the new authority not previously cited includes Justice Breyer’s concurrence in
`
`Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse Elecs., Inc., 136 S. Ct. 1923, 1932 (2016) and Mich. Motor Techs. LLC
`
`v. Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft, 472 F. Supp. 3d 377, 383 (E.D. Mich. 2020).
`
`Because these new arguments and authority were presented for the first time in Silicon
`
`Labs’ Reply, Ocean has not had any opportunity to respond to or address the new legal
`
`arguments or authority in briefing regarding Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.
`
`A copy of the sur-reply brief that Ocean would file, if permitted to do so by the Court, is
`
`attached as Exhibit A.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-01214-ADA Document 18 Filed 04/08/21 Page 3 of 4
`
`Dated: April 8, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Alex Chan
`Timothy Devlin
`tdevlin@devlinlawfirm.com
`Henrik D. Parker
`hparker@devlinlawfirm.com
`Alex Chan (State Bar No. 24108051)
`achan@devlinlawfirm.com
`DEVLIN LAW FIRM LLC
`1526 Gilpin Avenue
`Wilmington, DE 19806
`Telephone: (302) 449-9010
`Facsimile: (302) 353-4251
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`OCEAN SEMICONDUCTOR LLC
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 6:20-cv-01214-ADA Document 18 Filed 04/08/21 Page 4 of 4
`
`CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
`
`Pursuant to Local Rule CV-7(i), the undersigned, counsel for Plaintiff, hereby certifies
`
`that on April 2, 2021, counsel for Plaintiff conferred by email with counsel for Defendant and
`
`that Defendant is unopposed to the relief requested herein.
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Alex Chan
`Alex Chan
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on April 8, 2021, I caused a copy of this document to be served by
`
`transmitting it via e-mail or electronic transmission to counsel of record for Defendant.
`
`
`
`/s/ Alex Chan
`Alex Chan
`
`
`
`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
