Motion To Compel Supplementation Of Contentions

The issue was whether the plaintiff would be required to supplement its infringement contentions.
The issue was whether the plaintiff would be required to supplement its infringement contentions.
You don’t often see FRCP 68 used to terminate a patent case.
We haven’t got Judge Craven much longer. So we need to enjoy her rulings while we still can.
The defendants sought more time for the deposition of the plaintiff’s corporate deponent, who is its sole employee and the inventor on the patent in suit.
Yes, I mean ex parte review – both IPR-based stay motions were denied last year.
You know how you can ask for both an appetizer and a salad? It turns out you can actually do that with motions to stay as well. (I mean ask).
These were my favorites with the boys. Turn out that “Use Your Words” is helpful advice in my day job as well.
Final judgments aren’t really final as long as we have FRCP 59 – as this amended judgment shows.