Defendant Leica Camera, Inc. (“Leica Camera”) moves for an extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint for Patent Infringement (“Complaint”) to February 15, 2010, for the reasons stated herein. The relief requested by this Motion is unopposed.

Counsel for Leica Camera conferred in good faith with counsel for plaintiff e.Digital Corporation regarding the relief requested in this Motion, who stated that plaintiff does not oppose the relief requested in this Motion.

1. The Complaint was filed on November 2, 2009. Leica Camera, Inc. was served on December 9, 2009. Absent an extension, Leica Camera has to and including December 29, 2009, to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint.

2. The undersigned counsel was recently retained to represent Leica Camera in this case. The undersigned has had no previous engagement with said defendant and no previous experience or knowledge of defendant’s business, the product(s) allegedly at issue, or the patents allegedly at issue. The undersigned requires additional time to conduct sufficient preliminary inquiries to frame a knowledgeable response to the Complaint, among other things.

3. The undersigned recognizes that an extension of approximately 45 days may be longer than the Court might otherwise prefer. However, the potential complexity of this matter, considering the nature of the claims and the number of other defendants, including foreign corporations, and products, will require more preliminary investigation than is typical. Also, the investigation is complicated by the holiday season, conflicting with pre-existing personal holiday commitments of counsel and client. The undersigned represents to the Court that the extension requested is needed given the circumstances of this case.

4. This is defendant’s first request for extension of time to respond to the Complaint.

5. Defendant does not believe that the requested extension will materially prejudice any party or the Court or result in any undue delay of the trial in this case. A review of the docket indicates that various other defendants have not yet been served. As of the date of the preparation of this Motion, counsel for only one other defendant has entered an appearance in this proceeding.

6. Pursuant to D.C.Colo.LCivR 6.1(E), counsel has served a copy of this Motion on its designated client representative, as indicated in the certificate of service. The client is also otherwise aware of the relief sought and has authorized this Motion.

WHEREFORE, Leica Camera respectfully requests that the Court enter an order extending the deadline for it to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint to and including February 15, 2010. A proposed form of Order is attached for the Court’s convenience.

DATED: December 23, 2009. Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Bruce Featherstone

Bruce A. Featherstone

Matthew Collins