Does not mention the limitation to the infringement of the '115 patent agreed to by the Defendants' counsel Carlan in open court a trial...on 10/15/13...
Tit for tat, they did it so we can too...trouble is Plaintiffs did not do it..
Right. "...Defendants cited new portions of the record, just as Plaintiffs did in their Reply brief." True, but not as per Judge Stark's Order.
.they did not comply with his scheduling order..
"Allowing Plaintiffs' alternative relief of another round of briefing (He ignores Judge Stark's obvious other option here, striking Defendants' DFFs 225-253 and 257, a bit of hubris...) is impractical and unnecessary, and would simply result in delay and add additional burden on the Court. Accordingly, Defendants respectfully request the Court to deny Plaintiff's Motion To Strike and not allow additional briefing..."
He asks for a mutual strike...
This should draw another letter from Maryellen Noreika....probably tm...if I were Judge Stark, the tone of this letter would irk me at best..