Filed: Jun. 09, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 09, 2014
Summary: UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY IN SUPPORT OF FEDERAL DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, STRIKE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1) and Local Rule 6-1, Defendants Michelle K. Lee and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (collectively "USPTO") respectfully move for a two-week extension of time, to June 23, 2014, to file a reply in support of their Motion to Dismiss or, in the
Summary: UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY IN SUPPORT OF FEDERAL DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, STRIKE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1) and Local Rule 6-1, Defendants Michelle K. Lee and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (collectively "USPTO") respectfully move for a two-week extension of time, to June 23, 2014, to file a reply in support of their Motion to Dismiss or, in the ..
More
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY IN SUPPORT OF FEDERAL DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, STRIKE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1) and Local Rule 6-1, Defendants Michelle K. Lee and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (collectively "USPTO") respectfully move for a two-week extension of time, to June 23, 2014, to file a reply in support of their Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Strike the First Amended Complaint. A response is currently due June 9, 2014. Mr. Hyatt's counsel have advised that they do not oppose this request for additional time.
In support of this motion, the USPTO relies on the following Memorandum of Points and Authorities.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1) and Local Rule 6-1 allow a party to request additional time to perform an act. Here, the USPTO's request for additional time to file a reply in support of its Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Strike the First Amended Complaint is warranted because of the schedule of counsel for the USPTO. Specifically, Mr. Hyatt's response was filed on Friday, May 30, 2014. The undersigned defense counsel had an oral argument at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Tuesday, June 3, 2014, and has a brief due in a different appeal at the Federal Circuit on Thursday, June 12, 2014. The USPTO also has a reply brief due in this Court, in case no. 2:14-cv-00311-LDG-GWF, on the same day as this brief, June 9, 2014. The USPTO is requesting a two-week extension until June 23, 2014, in that case as well.
Mr. Hyatt's counsel have advised that they do not oppose this request for additional time.
For these reasons, the USPTO respectfully requests that the Court extend the deadline to file a reply in support of the USPTO's Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Strike the First Amended Complaint to June 23, 2014. This request is made in good faith and not for purposes of undue delay.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
