Category: Northern District Practice Tips
-
Judge Solis Denies Motion to Withdraw As Counsel in Galaxy Powersports Case
On July 25, 2012, Judge Solis denied Ufot Umana and Stanley Kuan’s motion to withdraw as counsel for defendant Benzhou Vehicle Industry Group (decision available here). Movants had sought to withdraw as counsel after being discharged by Benzhou in March 2012, and movants and Benzhou could not effectively communicate nor agree on case strategy. In…
-
Get Your Filings In On Time
In the Northern District of Texas, pleadings, motions, or other papers that are filed electronically before midnight central time of any day will be deemed filed on that day. See LR 6.1. The attached decision from the ITC reminds us to comply with filing deadlines. In In re Certain Digital Photo Frames and Image Display Devices…
-
Cian Patent Infringement Case Transferred BACK to Judge Lynn From The Western District of Texas
On December 5, 2011, after the effective date of the America Invents Act, Cian IP LLC filed five patent infringement cases in the Northern District of Texas against five separate defendants (Aeroflex Incorporated, Agilent Technologies Inc, National Instruments Corporation, Pickering Interfaces Ltd., and Spirent Communications). (Aeroflex and Spirent have now settled with Cian.) Thereafter, as…
-
Judge McBryde’s Standing Order Prohibiting Electronic Filing
We previously noted that Judge McBryde does not allow electronic filing in any of his cases. We’ve attached his Standing Order prohibiting electronic filing here. This Standing Order, when entered in Judge McBryde’s cases, trumps Local Rule 5.1(e)’s general requirement that, unless the presiding judge otherwise directs, an attorney must file any pleading (except a…
-
Magistrate Judge Ramirez Recommends that H-W Technology’s Patent Claims Against Apple be Severed and Transferred Out of the Northern District of Texas
On July 5, 2012, Magistrate Judge Ramirez issued Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation (available here) in the H-W Technology, L.C. v. Apple, Inc., et al. case. In H-W Technology, H-W Technology sued 32 defendants claiming infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,525,955.[1] Apple moved the Court to dismiss it from the action for improper joinder, or, in…
-
Patent Infringement Litigation: Can You Keep A Case In The Eastern District of Texas?
In the old days, once you rounded up patent infringers, you could (in nearly all cases) file a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas without much fear that it would be transferred out of the District. After all, cases filed in the Eastern District of Texas were “not being consigned to the wastelands of…
-
When Litigating in Judge Solis’ Court, Don’t Put Citations In Footnotes
We recently came across Judge Solis’ decision in United States v. HCA Health Services of Oklahoma, Inc., 09-CV-0992, 2011 WL 4590791 (N.D. Tex. Sept. 30, 2011). Judge Solis stated: “All Parties puts their citations in footnotes. In this District and according to Blue Book Rule B2, citations should be presented in the text of the…
-
What To Look For When Selecting Local Counsel
We act as local counsel in the Northern District of Texas and often use local counsel for our cases that are pending outside of Texas. Here are some things we think you should look for when selecting local counsel. Knowledge of Your Judge’s Individual Practices and Preferences. Your local counsel should be able to act…
-
Practice Tip: Electronically Redacting Documents
Courts in the Northern District of Texas require, in certain instances, parties to redact filings (e.g., when filing briefs that contain materials designated under the Court’s Protective Order). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.1 requires redaction of certain sensitive personal information. And nobody’s client wants its confidential material in public filings. Many times, a party…
-
Is the Plaintiff’s Choice of Venue a Factor in the Section 1404(a) Venue Analysis in the Northern District of Texas?
We recently noticed the Court’s opinion in Wells Fargo Bank v. Bank of America (pdf copy of the decision here). The opinion dealt with Bank of America’s motion to transfer venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Bank of America sought to transfer the case to the Southern District of New York, and the Court…