Free Declaration in Support - District Court of California - California


File Size: 77.6 kB
Pages: 2
Date: February 19, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: California
Category: District Court of California
Author: unknown
Word Count: 424 Words, 2,244 Characters
Page Size: 620.16 x 797.279 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cand/192394/48-8.pdf

Download Declaration in Support - District Court of California ( 77.6 kB)


Preview Declaration in Support - District Court of California
Case 3:07-cv-02385-PJH

Document 48-8

Filed 02/19/2008

Page 1 of 2

Case 3:07-cv-02385-PJH

Document 48-8

Filed 02/19/2008

Page 2 of 2

J O N E S DAY
S i L l C O h VALLEV O i F i C E

.

!755 EMi3ARCADERG R C A D

. P A L 0 ALTO, C A i l i C R N 1 A

94303

TELEPHONE 650-739-3939

. F A C S I M ! i E . 650-739-3900
Diiect Number (653) 687-41 29 je@ore@pnesaay corn

JPOl l486:JEG

January 3 1. 2008

Debra L. Dennett McDermott Will & Emery

Re:

1Yordic Akturals, Inc. v. .J.X. Cnrlson Laboratories, Inc., et al. Case No. C-07-2385

Dear Debra: We received Lour Januarj 3 1, 2008 letter at 5 : V P M this evening. We cannot agree to lour last-minute request. 1 he Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement Bas finalized and filed with the court over a rnonth ago on December 21. 2007. The parties have had several telephone conversations since that time specifically regarding claim construction issues and l o u have uaited until t\\o business days before Nordic's opening brief is due to add neu e ~ i d e n c e It appears tha? defendants are not raking the claim construction process and the Local Patent Rules seriousij. Despite your earlier request that certain depositions be taken as part of claim construction discover) a single business day prior to the close of claim construction discovery, me, in the spirit of cooperation, have agreed to provide you with the inventor's deposition in time for its use in your brief per my letter to you on January 23, 2008. However. u e cannot continue :o support defendants' prejudicial actions by stipulating to this most recent request. The desendants' current request is highlj improper and is prejudicial to Nordic, especially gi\ en the short period of time in \+hi& h'ordic has to evaluate this new evidence and the fact that claim construction in this case closed almost two w e k s ago on January 18, 2008. Nordic nil1 not stipulate to this eleventh hour amendment of your proposed claim constructions to nith respect to newly listed references and new citations from existing references. Hox$c~er, ec15c crtat~on ahead) been ?I-01 cd for a different term, of if :he addiliori is to has i G d S Lie;lca; a, l;v;mgrzp?h.L.2ZCIOT $" i k c t t inc , i , ~ d j ? ~ g t <
m .-