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

E.D. Tex.

Luminati Networks Ltd. v. BI Science Inc., No. 2:18-cv-00483 (E.D. Tex. June 19, 2019)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:18-cv-00483, Dkt. No. 87
Decided
June 19, 2019
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re 86 Unopposed Motion to Extend Time to Answer Counterclaims
Length
2 pages

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 Plaintiff Luminati Networks Ltd.’s (“Luminati”) Unopposed Motion to Extend Time to Answer Counterclaims (the “Motion”). (Dkt. No. 86.) Luminati represents that it intends to file a motion to dismiss some but not all of the counterclaims asserted against it in BIScience Inc.’s (“BIScience”) Answer and, because the law is unclear as to whether a partial motion to dismiss extends the time to answer all claims under Rule 12(a)(4), Luminati filed this Motion seeking such an extension out of an abundance of caution.