Or, possibly this Msft announcement involves Pegatron and/or RIMM? Remember, it was just two months ago that MSFT and PTSI signed this PLA:
Pegatron licenses Microsoft's patent portfolio for Android and Chrome devices
By Michael Gorman posted Apr 25th 2012 1:07PM
www.engadget.com/2012/04/25/pegatron-licenses-microsofts-patent-porfolio-for-android-and-ch/
___________
July 25 – Discovery Cut-off
NON-PARTY MICROSOFT CORPORATION'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR
AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO MOVE TO LIMIT OR QUASH
COMPLAINANTS' SUBPOENA
Pursuant to Rules 201.15 and 210.32 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 C.F.R. §§ 210.15 and 210.32, non-party Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft")
hereby moves for an extension of time to file a motion to limit or quash the subpoena duces
tecum issued by the U.S. International Trade Commission upon application made by
Complainants InterDigtial Communications, LLC, InterDigital Technology Corp., and IPR
Licensing, Inc. on June 5, 2012. Microsoft received the subpoena on June 6, 2012. Pursuant
to the subpoena any motion to limit or quash the subpoena is currently due on June 18, 2012,
and Microsoft is required to produce documents on June 15, 2012, or at such other time and
place agreed upon. Microsoft respectfully requests an extension of time to limit or quash the
subpoena until June 25, 2012.
-2-
Microsoft seeks this extension in order to conduct its internal investigation into the
issues raised in the subpoena. In addition, Microsoft seeks additional time to negotiate with
Complainants to come to a mutual agreement regarding the scope of the document requests
and deposition topics in an effort to avoid motions practice. Assuming that the parties can
reach an agreement regarding the scope of the subpoena, by June 25, 2012, Complainants
and Microsoft have agreed to set a date certain for production of documents. Accordingly,
Microsoft asserts that good cause exists to grant this extension.
Microsoft certifies that counsel for Complainants and the OUII do not object to
Microsoft's request for an extension. Microsoft has also contacted counsel for Respondents
and they do not object to Microsoft's request for an extension.
For the foregoing reasons, Microsoft respectfully requests that the Administrative
Law Judge grant Microsoft's motion for an extension of time to limit or quash Complainants'
subpoena to June 25, 2012.
_______
NON-PARTY PEGATRON TECHNOLOGY SERVICE, INC.'S
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR A SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME TO
RESPOND TO AND/OR MOVE TO QUASH OR LIMIT RESPONDENTS' SUBPOENAS
Pursuant to Rules 210.15 and 210.32 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 C.F.R. §§ 210.15 and 21.32, and the Ground Rules, non-party Pegatron
Technology Service, Inc. ("PTSI") hereby moves the Court to extend the deadline for responding
to and/or moving to quash or limit the subpoenas duces tecum and ad testificandum ("the
subpoenas") served on it by Respondents Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd, Huawei Device USA,
Ltd., Futurewei Technologies, Inc., Nokia Corporation Nokia, Inc., ZTE Corporation, ZTE
(USA) Inc., LG Electronics, Inc., LG electronics USA, Inc., and LG Electronics Mobilecomm
USA, Inc. ("Respondents") on May 31, 2012 and received by PTSI on June 1. Pursuant to the
subpoenas and the first extension of time, PTSI is required to move to quash and/or limit the
subpoenas by June 15, 2012, it must produce documents by June 20, and it must produce a
witness for deposition on July 2. PTSI requests an extension of time to respond to and/or move to quash or limit the subpoenas to Monday, June 25, 2012.
There is good cause to grant the requested extension. Counsel for PTSI and the
Respondents have begun good-faith negotiations over the relevance and scope of the documents
sought by the subpoenas and issues related to PTSI's lack of possession, custody, and control of
those documents. Additional time will also allow PTSI to continue its investigation into the
requested information and to continue to negotiate with Respondents regarding the above issues.
This motion seeks a modest extension of the document production date of three business days, and PTSI understands the discovery cut-off is not until July 25. The grant of this motion will create no appreciable delay in discovery.
PTSI certifies that its counsel met and conferred with David Haller and Jennifer Farina of Covington and Burling, counsel for Respondents, regarding the substance of this motion and they do not oppose this motion.
________
NON-PARTY RESEARCH IN MOTION CORPORATION'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND
Non-party Research In Motion Corporation ("RIM"), by its attorneys and by agreement
of the parties and the Office of Unfair Import Investigations (“OUII”), moves this tribunal for an
extension of the date on which RIM must answer or otherwise respond to the Subpoena Duces
Tecum And Ad Testificandum issued by the United States International Trade Commission upon
an application made by Respondent Huawei in the above-entitled investigation ("Subpoena"), to
and including June 21, 2012. In support of its motion, RIM states as follows:
1. The Subpoena requires RIM to take certain action, including filing any motion
concerning the Subpoena, within 10 days after receipt of the Subpoena, namely by June 11,
2012.
2. RIM requests an extension of time until June 21, 2012 to answer or otherwise
respond to the Subpoena, including filing a motion concerning the Subpoena.
3. RIM seeks this extension in order to conduct its internal investigation and, if
appropriate, negotiate with Respondents regarding the scope of the Subpoena, potentially
avoiding the need for contested motion practice.
4. Counsel for Huawei, on behalf of Respondents, as well as counsel for
Complainant InterDigital, Inc. and the OUII do not object to the extension sought by this Motion.
2658722.1 02 - 2 -
WHEREFORE, RIM respectfully requests that this Tribunal grant its Motion for
extension of time to and including June 21, 2012, to respond to the Subpoena.
| 