Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-00119/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-00119-24/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SYNCHRONOSS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

DROPBOX INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 16-cv-00119-HSG 

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S 

MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER

Re: Dkt. No. 142

On September 5, 2017, Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore denied Plaintiff’s request to 

strike portions of a declaration by Defendant’s expert, Dr. Michael J. Freedman, and granted 

Defendant’s request to strike the declaration of Christopher Alpaugh, Plaintiff’s expert. Dkt. No. 

141. On September 19, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for relief from Judge Westmore’s order. 

Dkt. No. 142. On September 29, 2017, Defendant filed an opposition. Dkt. No. 146. The Court 

has carefully reviewed Judge Westmore’s order, Plaintiff’s motion, Defendant’s opposition, and 

the relevant legal authorities. Judge Westmore’s order is well-reasoned and thorough. The Court 

affirms the non-dispositive order because it is not “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” See 

Grimes v. City & Cty. of San Francisco, 951 F.2d 236, 240 (9th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, the 

Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for relief from Judge Westmore’s non-dispositive pretrial order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

10/24/2017

Case 4:16-cv-00119-HSG Document 157 Filed 10/24/17 Page 1 of 1