Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Federal Judiciary Blogs -> Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice

Federal Judiciary

: Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice

Motion for Leave to Amend Infringement Contentions Granted; Motions to Compel Granted in Part

By Michael C. Smith

MedioStream, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, et. al., 2:08cv00369 (Oct. 18, 2010)

Judge: Chad Everingham   

Holding: Motions for Leave to Amend Infringement Contentions GRANTED; Motions to Compel GRANTED in part

This order addresses pending motions by the plaintiff to amend its infringement contentions against two defendants, and motions to compel as to three defendants. 

After detailing the procedural context of a motion for leave to amend PICs after the deadline for infringement contentions is passed, Judge Everingham addressed the claims as to the individual defendants. With respect to Microsoft, plaintiff sought to amend to add Microsoft's various operating systems.  With respect to Sonic Solutions, plaintiff sought to add citations to source code and revise its disclosures as to the accused products.  After analyzing the relevant factors, the Court granted leave to amend contentions as to these defendants.

As to the motions to compel, plaintiff sought source code and design documents from Microsoft, Sonic Solutions, and Nero. 

With respect to Microsoft, plaintiff was aksing for was a "replica" of the source code repository, which Microsoft contended might not be possible, and even if it were, would costs millions of dollars and require essential personnel to spend months at the task.  The Court agreed with Microsoft, and denied the motion insofar as it sought a duplication of the source code repository, and granted the motion otherwise, meaning complete production of the design documents (which Microsoft contended it had already done) within fifteen days and submit a declaration to that effect, and provide access to its source code repository insofar as it related to the accused functionality.

Plaintiff contended only that Sonic had not completed production of its design documents and source code.  The Court granted the motion and ordered Sonic to complete its production and certify completion within fifteen days. 

With respect to Nero, again plaintiff contended that Nero had not yet provided all requested source code and design documentation, and Nero claimed that it had, and objected to re-producing in a different format.  The Court again ordered certification that all documents had been produced in fifteen days, and declined to require re-production in a different format.

Full post as published by Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice on October 20, 2010 (boomark / email).