Asus Technology Licensing Inc. et al v. AT&T Inc. et al, No. 2:23-cv-00486 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 19, 2024)

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 Plaintiffs’ Opposed Motion to Expedite Briefing on their Motion to Lift Stay. Dkt. No. 330. Plaintiffs argue that “ [e]xpedited briefing on the motion to lift the stay is necessary because Defendants have made it clear they plan to use the present stay to impose significant delays on the entire infringement case for purely tactical purposes.” I d. at 1. For example, Defendants are refusing to agree to schedule depositions,” even though Plaintiffs have announced they are dismissing some of the claims in the anti-trust case. Id.