Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

TYNTEC INC. v. SYNIVERSE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, 8:17-cv-591-T-26MAP. (2017)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20170410645 Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 28, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: ORDER RICHARD A. LAZZARA , District Judge . UPON DUE AND CAREFUL CONSIDERATION of the procedural history of this case, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the parties' Joint Consent Motion for Entry of Order (Dkt. 34) is granted in part and denied in part. The Court grants the motion only to the extent that Defendant shall file its response to the Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction on or before March 31, 2017, limited to twenty-five (25) pages. Defendant shall also file its r
More

ORDER

UPON DUE AND CAREFUL CONSIDERATION of the procedural history of this case, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the parties' Joint Consent Motion for Entry of Order (Dkt. 34) is granted in part and denied in part. The Court grants the motion only to the extent that Defendant shall file its response to the Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction on or before March 31, 2017, limited to twenty-five (25) pages. Defendant shall also file its response to Plaintiff's complaint on or before March 31, 2017. Should the response consist of a motion to dismiss, Plaintiff shall file its response within the time required by Local Rule 3.01(b). Due to the fact that this Court is committed to conducting a jury trial commencing on Monday, April 3, 2017, which is projected to last approximately three (3) weeks, the parties should not expect to have a hearing on Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction prior to April 7, 2017. Moreover, under Local Rule 3.01(j), "[m]otions and other applications will ordinarily be determined by the Court on the basis of the motion papers and briefs or legal memoranda[.]"

DONE AND ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer