`FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Civil Action No.: 1:19-cv-11586-IT
`
`
`
`
`PHILIPS NORTH AMERICA LLC,
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`FITBIT, INC.,
`
` Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`JOINT MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITS AND
`ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO OPPOSE MOTION TO DISMISS
`
`Plaintiff Philips North America LLC (“Philips”) and Defendant Fitbit, Inc. (“Fitbit”)
`
`
`
`respectfully and jointly move to exceed the page limits imposed by Local Rule 7.1(b)(4) by five
`
`pages in connection with Fitbit’s intended motion to dismiss Philips’ Amended Complaint and
`
`Philips’ corresponding opposition. In addition, the parties respectfully and jointly move for an
`
`enlargement of time of seven days for Philips to file an opposition to Fitbit’s motion to dismiss.
`
`In support of this motion, the parties jointly state as follows:
`
`1. In response to Philips’ Complaint, Fitbit filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R.
`
`Civ. Proc. 12(b)(6) on the grounds that the asserted patents claim unpatentable subject matter
`
`pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 101 and Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014).
`
`(ECF No. 20). Philips responded to Fitbit’s motion to dismiss by filing an Amended Complaint.
`
`(ECF No. 25).
`
`2. In response to the Amended Complaint, Fitbit intends to re-file a motion to dismiss based
`
`on the same grounds that the asserted patents claim unpatentable subject matter pursuant to 35
`
`
`
`U.S.C. § 101 and Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014). The parties
`
`jointly agree that a modest enlargement of five (5) pages to the page limit imposed by Local Rule
`
`7.1(b)(4) will enable the parties to better explain to the Court the technology relating to the
`
`asserted patents in this case.
`
`3. In addition, the parties jointly request that Philips be granted a modest enlargement of
`
`seven days to file its opposition to Fitbit’s motion to dismiss. This is Philips’ second request for
`
`an extension of any of its deadlines.
`
`WHEREFORE, the parties jointly and respectfully request that the Court enter an order
`
`granting this Joint Motion as follows:
`
`a. Defendant Fitbit’s Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss Philips’ Amended
`
`Complaint may exceed the page limits imposed by Local Rule 7.1(b)(4) by five pages, for
`
`a total page limit of twenty-five pages;
`
`b. Plaintiff Philips’ Opposition to Fitbit’s Motion to Dismiss may exceed the page limits
`
`imposed by Local Rule 7.1(b)(4) by five pages, for a total page limit of twenty-five
`
`pages; and
`
`c. The time for Philips to file an opposition to Fitbit’s Motion to Dismiss be enlarged by
`
`seven days.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Jointly and respectfully submitted on this 6th day of December, 2019,
`
`FITBIT, INC.
`by its attorneys,
`
`/s/ David Beckwith_____________
`Jennifer B. Furey (BBO # 634174)
`Andrew T. O’Connor (BBO # 664811)
`GOULSTON & STORRS PC
`400 Atlantic Avenue
`Boston, MA 02110
`Telephone: (617) 482-1776
`Facsimile: (617) 574-4112
`E-mail: jfurey@goulstonstorrs.com
`
` aoconnor@goulstonstorrs.com
`
`and
`
`Yar R. Chaikovsky (Pro Hac Vice)
`David Beckwith (Pro Hac Vice)
`David T. Okano (Pro Hac Vice)
`Berkeley G. Fife (Pro Hac Vice)
`PAUL HASTINGS, LLP
`1117 S. California Ave.
`Palo Alto, CA 94304
`Telephone: (650) 320-1800
`Facsimile: (650) 320-1900
`E-mail: davidbeckwith@paulhastings.com
`
` yarchaikovsky@paulhastings.com
`
` davidokano@paulhastings.com
`
` berkeleyfife@paulhastings.com
`
`Chad J. Peterman (Pro Hac Vice)
`PAUL HASTINGS, LLP
`200 Park Avenue
`New York, NY 10166
`Telephone: (212) 318-6797
`Facsimile: (212) 230-7797
`E-mail: chadpeterman@paulhastings.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that, on December 6, 2019, I electronically filed the foregoing with the
`
`Clerk’s Office using the Court’s CM/ECF system, which will send notification of this filing
`(NEF) to all registered participants, and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as non-
`registered participants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ David Beckwith
`David Beckwith
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
