`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`GESTURE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS,
`LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`APPLE INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Civil Action No. 6:21-cv-00121-ADA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO
`COMPEL FURTHER VENUE DISCOVERY
`
`Defendant Apple Inc. filed a Motion to Transfer Venue Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)
`
`on July 30, 2021. Dkt. No. 21. On September 22, 2021, Plaintiff Gesture Technology Partners,
`
`LLC served on Apple written venue and jurisdictional discovery pertaining to Apple’s motion,
`
`including Requests for Production. The venue and jurisdictional discovery period ended on
`
`November 15, 2021.
`
`On November 15, 2021, Gesture raised with the Court a discovery dispute regarding
`
`certain of its requests for production to Apple. On November 19, 2021, Gesture submitted to the
`
`Court a summary of the parties’ position on the dispute. In that summary, Gesture requested that
`
`the Court compel Apple to produce further documents in response to the following requests for
`
`production:
`
`2.
`
`5.
`
`Documents sufficient to show location(s) of any and all Apple employees,
`agents, contractors, or other proxies physically located or residing in Texas.
`
`Documents sufficient to identify all Apple employees, agents, contractors,
`or other proxies who have (a) worked in, (b) resided in, or (c) supported or
`worked on Apple physical equipment or software located in the Texas . . . ,
`including, … documents sufficient to identify each employee’s name, title,
`. . . a description of the employee’s responsibilities, . . . employment.
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00121-ADA Document 32 Filed 11/30/21 Page 2 of 3
`
`9.
`
`Documents sufficient to show any development, support, programming,
`design or sales and marketing of the Accused Products or Features located
`in or accessible in Texas during the Relevant Time Period.
`
`Gesture also requested that Apple produce documents within the following categories of
`
`documents:
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Identification of employees in nine groups listed in Apple’s venue
`declaration who Apple claims were instrumental in developing Accused
`Products.
`
`Identification of each Apple employee in Austin.
`
`Third-party suppliers in Texas that supply hardware or software in
`Accused Products.
`
`Third-party suppliers in Texas that provided contract engineering services
`for Accused Products.
`
`Gesture contends that these four categories of documents fall within its prior requests for
`
`production. Apple’s position is that these four categories of documents do not fall within
`
`Gesture’s requests for production, and are thus new requests.
`
`On November 22, 2021, the Court held a discovery hearing by Zoom. During that
`
`hearing, counsel for Apple represented to the Court that Apple employees who work on the
`
`research, design, development, sales, licensing, and marketing of the accused features of the
`
`accused products are not located in Texas, and that documents relating to that work were neither
`
`created in Texas nor are, or have been, located in Texas.
`
`The Court has reviewed each of Gesture’s requests for production and categories of
`
`documents for which Gesture is seeking further documents from Apple. Based on this review
`
`and the representations from Apple, the Court DENIES Gesture’s motion to compel as to
`
`Gesture’s Request for Production Nos. 2, 5, and 9, and the additional categories of documents 1-
`
`4 reproduced above.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00121-ADA Document 32 Filed 11/30/21 Page 3 of 3
`
`ORDERED this 30th day of November, 2021.
`
`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
