Roy-G-Biv Corporation v. Fanuc Ltd. et al, No. 2:07-cv-00418 (E.D. Tex. July 9, 2009)

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration of Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Protective Order. Dkt. No. 176. Also before the Court is Plaintiff’s response. Dkt. No. 181. Having considered the arguments of counsel, all relevant papers and pleadings, the Court finds that Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration should be DENIED. Previously, Plaintiff requested a protective order with regard to seven subpoenas, which sought information from various individuals concerning reexamination proceedings connected to the patents-in-suit. Dkt.