FRCP 12(b)(6) motions are sometimes joined with 12(e) requests for more information. This order granted or denied the former – no repleading required.
This order resolved the dispute over the applicability of the first to file rule to a case where there was an issue regarding personal jurisdiction.
This order sets the scope of a court’s examination of whether an offer complied with FRAND obligations
Often an agreement is made to swap out related defendants in a case. This somewhat less exciting practice usually contains certain provisions such as those set out in this order.
This was a motion to dismiss for unenforceability and lack of standing, so if the effect of assignments are your thing, this is your lucky day.
Following a hearing, the Court entered this order allowing a party to add a new defendant in a patent after the deadline, and deeming them already served.
Parties sometimes seek to add specific claims or defenses to cases late. This order is a succinct example of what adding such a “rifle shot” defense and conducting necessary discovery on it can look like.
This is an interesting opinion which deals with how a patent defendant’s counterclaims of infringement against a plaintiff are fitted into the existing case.
Does the filing of a motion to dismiss extend the defendant’s time to answer the rest of the complaint? Inquiring minds wanted to know, and this opinion from Judge Gilstrap aligns him with the majority rule on the question.
Ever run into that situation where a motion to dismiss is followed by an amended complaint and you’re left scratching your head trying to figure out where that leaves you procedurally? Well wonder no more, because this recent opinion collects the cases and explains the pleadings version of rock, paper, scissors.