Free
Message: e.Digital Corporation v. Apple Inc. ( new filed October 21st )
Reply New Message
Prev Message Back To Forum Threaded View Next Message

the court did respond to Fuji though...."ORDER Denying 68 Ex Parte Motion to Shorten Time."

In regard to "compliance with Rule 83.3" of which O'shea responed today ...

10/22/2013 70

Ex Parte MOTION to Shorten Time , renewed to clarify compliance with Rule 83.3 by Fujifilm Corporation, Fujifilm Holdings America Corporation, Fujifilm Holdings Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Vera Ranieri, # 2 Proposed Order)(O'Shea, Kevin) (Entered: 10/22/2013)

And he filed the same for Apple today regarding compliance with Local Rule 83.3 connected to considered problem doc 55.... having the proposed order within...

10/22/2013 56 DECLARATION re 55 Ex Parte MOTION to Shorten Time re Motion to Amend Judgment, Motion to Stay re compliance with Local Rule 83.3 by Defendant Apple Inc., Counter Claimant Apple Inc.. (O'Shea, Kevin) (Entered: 10/22/2013)

=====

He covered problem doc 55 with 56 before the judge ruled on it....

doni

5 Recommendations
Reply New Message
Prev Message Back To Forum Threaded View Next Message
Share
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply