On March 9, 2012, ALJ Pender issued an order denying non-party Openwave System Inc.’s (“Openwave”) motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum and subpoena ad testificandum served by Respondent Apple, Inc. (“Apple”). The order similarly denied Openwave’s request to shift costs to Apple. ALJ Pender denied the motion on procedural grounds for failure to comply with Ground Rule 2.2. He also denied the motion on the merits for failure to show that the requested discovery was not relevant, that Apple lacked a need for the discovery, and that the subpoena was unduly burdensome. However, ALJ Pender granted Openwave’s request to limit the subpoenas, which included topics that required Openwave to engage in claim construction to respond to the subpoenas.
Register Now As you are not an existing subscriber please register for your free daily legal newsfeed service.Register
If you have any questions about the service please contact firstname.lastname@example.org or call Lexology Customer Services on +44 20 7234 0606.
ALJ Pender denies a non-party motion to quash but grants motion to limit subpoenas issued in 337-TA-808
- McDermott Will & Emery
- Blair M. Jacobs, Robert J. Walters, Christopher L. May and Christina A. Ondrick
- March 9 2012
If you are interested in submitting an article to Lexology, please contact Andrew Teague at email@example.com.
Group Manager, Legal and Business Services
Australian Grand Prix Corporation