Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

ESCO CORPORATION v. CASHMAN EQUIPMENT COMPANY, 2:12-cv-01545-RCJ-CWH (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20150722c83 Visitors: 3
Filed: Jul. 21, 2015
Latest Update: Jul. 21, 2015
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO ESCO'S MOTION FOR LIMITED RECONSIDERATION [DKT 186] First Request ROBERT C. JONES , District Judge . Plaintiffs ESCO Corporation and ESCO Canada Ltd. (collectively "Plaintiffs") and Defendants Cashman Equipment Company, Caterpillar Global Mining LLC, Caterpillar, Inc., Raptor Mining Products, (USA), Inc. and Raptor Mining Products, Inc. (collectively "Defendants"), through their undersigned counsel of record,
More

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO ESCO'S MOTION FOR LIMITED RECONSIDERATION [DKT 186]

First Request

Plaintiffs ESCO Corporation and ESCO Canada Ltd. (collectively "Plaintiffs") and Defendants Cashman Equipment Company, Caterpillar Global Mining LLC, Caterpillar, Inc., Raptor Mining Products, (USA), Inc. and Raptor Mining Products, Inc. (collectively "Defendants"), through their undersigned counsel of record, and pursuant to L.R. 6-1 and 7-1, hereby agree and stipulate to the Court's entry of an Order providing that Plaintiffs shall have a one week extension to file their Reply to Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Limited Reconsideration of the Court's Claim Construction Order [Dkt 186], originally filed on July 8, 2015. Plaintiffs' Reply is currently due on July 20, 2015. Defendants have now agreed to allow Plaintiffs one week of additional time to respond, making the Reply due on July 27, 2015. The parties have not previously requested extensions regarding Plaintiffs' Reply.

There is good cause for this stipulation, including the availability of Plaintiffs' counsel, and the number of recent or upcoming filings due between this case and the related Patent Office Trial proceedings, including but not limited to ESCO's Opposition to Caterpillar's Request for Rehearing in Case No. IPR2015-00409 before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (filed July 13), ESCO's Reply in Support of its Motions to Dismiss, Strike, Sever and Stay in this case (due July 16), and ESCO's Preliminary Response to Caterpillar's Petition in Case No. IPR2015-01032 before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (due July 17). This extension is not requested for any improper purpose or delay.

IT IS SO 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