Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. apple, Inc., No. 2:13-cv-01112 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 2, 2015)

Granted in Part
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:13-cv-01112, Dkt. No. 980
Decided
October 2, 2015
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J. — Marshall
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Length
2 pages

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

CONTENTGUARD HOLDINGS, INC., §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

v. § Case No. 2:13-CV-1112-JRG

§

AMAZON.COM, INC., et al., §

§

Defendants. § § §

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Before the Court is the Partially Opposed Motion to Continue Trial Date (Dkt. No. 938) (“Mot.”) filed by Apple Inc. (“Apple”). Apple requests a continuance of the trial date until after November 10, 2015, because of the unavailability of its corporate representative, Mr. Bud Tribble. Plaintiff ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. (“ContentGuard”) initially indicated a willingness to accommodate Apple’s request, so long as the trial would be complete prior to the Thanksgiving Holiday. See (Mot., at Certificate of Conference.) ContentGuard has since filed an opposition to Apple’s request. (Dkt. No. 975.) (“Opp.”) After consideration of the circumstances regarding Mr. Tribble’s unavailability, the Court finds that the Motion should be GRANTED-IN-PART. Accordingly, jury selection remains set for November 9, 2015. However, the Court hereby sets trial to begin at 8:30 A.M. CDT on November 11, 2015. Apple may, but is not required, to have another officer present at voir dire and later substitute Mr. Tribble as Apple’s corporate representative at the time the case-in-chief begins. Neither part shall disclose to the jury or the venire panel the reason or reasons for Mr. Tribble’s absence during jury selection, without express leave of Court.

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. apple, Inc., No. 2:13-cv-01112 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 2, 2015).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_13-cv-01112-9
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_13-cv-01112-9

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.