Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

E.D. Tex.

Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC, No. 2:13-cv-00259 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 15, 2014)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:13-cv-00259, Dkt. No. 97
Decided
December 15, 2014
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER denying 53 Motion Leave to Supplement
Length
1 page

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 MTEL’s Motion for Leave to Supplement the Expert Reports of Dr. Jay P. Kesan and Dr. Ray Ne ttleton (Dkt. 53, the “Motion” ). MTEL asks for leave to supplement, but fails to set forth good cause be yond the fact that the C ourt issued an order regarding the plain and ordinary meaning of the word “retrans mission.” (Mot.