Free Order Administratively Closing Case - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 12.9 kB
Pages: 2
Date: September 5, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 282 Words, 1,852 Characters
Page Size: 622 x 792 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/9344/273.pdf

Download Order Administratively Closing Case - District Court of Delaware ( 12.9 kB)


Preview Order Administratively Closing Case - District Court of Delaware
Case 1:05-cv-00027-SLR Document 273 Filed 09/05/2007 Paget of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
GUARDIAN INDUSTRIES )
CORPORATION, )
Plaintiff, g
v. g Civ. No. 05-027-SLR
DELL INC., et al., g
Defendants. g
O R D E R
At Wilmington this 5"‘ day of September, 2007, having conferred with counsel on
multiple occasions in an attempt to fashion an equitable solution to the above captioned
litigation, which litigation was instituted by plaintiff against various defendants accused
of selling Liquid Crystal Displays ("LCDs") andlor products relating to LCDs, which
products allegedly infringe certain of pIaintiff’s patents; and under the circumstances
presented by the instant litigationf
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The above captioned litigation is administratively closed for one year, in the
interests of preserving judicial resources and the status quo.
2. The court will conduct a telephonic status conference on September 8, 2008
at 4:30 p.m., with plaintiff’s counsel initiating the conference call. lf, as of September 8,
‘To wit, the defendants have no independent technical information about the
LCD products, but do have information relating to the identification of the manufacturers
of LCD products (already provided), as well as damages information.

Case 1:05-cv—OOO27—SLR Document 273 Filed O9/05/2007 Page 2 of 2
2008:
a. Plaintiff has commenced patent infringement litigation against all three of the
currently identified LCD manufacturers and the instant defendants have not provided
relevant damages information, the present case may be administratively reopened.
b. Plaintiff has not commenced patent infringement litigation against all three of
the currently identified LCD manufacturers, the case may be dismissed with prejudice.
United Statg s District Judge
2