Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04525/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04525-23/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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

AVAGO TECHNOLOGIES GENERAL IP 

(SINGAPORE) PTE LTD.,,

Plaintiff,

v.

ASUSTEK COMPUTER, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-04525-EMC 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 

DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S 

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE 

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Docket No. 181

Avago has filed a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration. The Court 

GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the motion. More specifically, the motion is denied in its 

entirety, with one exception. Avago has leave to file a motion for reconsideration only with 

respect to its argument that the Court should have permitted Avago to amend its infringement 

contentions with respect to fifteen (15) ASUS products that were not offered for sale until after the 

infringement contentions were served. See Docket No. 105 (Opp’n at 10) (ASUS, stating that “it 

is unclear which products falls in this category” but, “[t]o the extent [Avago] specifically identifies 

these products to ASUS and ASUS confirms they were released after the deadline for [Avago’s] 

original infringement contentions, ASUS does not oppose adding these new products”).

The Court deems the motion for leave as Avago’s motion to reconsider. ASUS shall file 

any opposition to the motion to reconsider (on the one argument alone) within two weeks of the

///

///

///

///

Case 3:15-cv-04525-EMC Document 182 Filed 03/08/16 Page 1 of 2
2

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

For the Northern District of California

date of this order. Avago shall file a reply within three weeks of the date of this order. Absent 

further order of the Court, the Court shall rule on the motion to reconsider based on the papers.

This order disposes of Docket No. 181.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 8, 2016

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-04525-EMC Document 182 Filed 03/08/16 Page 2 of 2