U.S. Ethernet Innovations v. Ricoh, et al., 6:12cv235 (11/15/13)
Judge: John Love
Holding: Motion to compel interrogatory responses and document production DENIED
“Filed at 8:46 pm on the last day of fact discovery, and admitting that only a select subset of Samsung’s systems-on-chip are at issue in this case,” Judge Love’s opinion begins, “USEI now demands “complete financials for all of [Samsung’s] ‘systems-on-chip.’”” (Emphasis in original). (Note to self: I am coming to realize that when the Court notes what time you filed something, that’s a bad sign).
In denying the motion, the Court noted that USEI’s motion with respect to Samsung was an untimely rehash of its previously rejected “reasonably-similar" products argument, this time in the guise of interrogatories directed to financial information. In denying that motion, Judge Love noted that he had admonished USEI for untimely raising a discovery dispute based on “reasonably similar” products, and accordingly denied the portion of the instant motion addressed to Samsung.