Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03148/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03148-51/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 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

1

Although dated March 13, 2007, the subject order was filed March 14, 2007.

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO.,

LTD.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

MEDIATEK, INC., et al.,

Defendants 

MEDIATEK, INC,

Counterclaimant,

 v.

MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO.,

LTD., et al.

Counterclaim Defendants

 /

No. C 05-3148 MMC

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT

PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S

OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE

SPERO’S MARCH 13, 2007 ORDER

Before the Court are plaintiff’s “Objections to Magistrate Judge Spero’s March 13,1

2007 Order Re Pending Discovery Motions”; said Objections were filed March 20, 2007.

The objections are based in substantial part on an asserted change of law occurring

after the time the subject order was issued. (See Objections, 1:22-26.) Under such

circumstances, the Objections are hereby DENIED, without prejudice to plaintiff’s filing a

Case 3:05-cv-03148-MMC Document 558 Filed 03/21/07 Page 1 of 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

2

motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration, to be presented to Magistrate Judge

Spero. See Civil L.R. 7-9(b)(2) (providing motion for leave to file motion for reconsideration

of order may be appropriate in light of “change of law occurring after the time of such

order”).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 21, 2007 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-03148-MMC Document 558 Filed 03/21/07 Page 2 of 2