Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-04669/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-04669-14/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

RICOH COMPANY, LTD.,

Plaintiff,

v.

AEROFLEX INCORPORATED, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C-03-4669 MJJ (EMC)

ORDER STRIKING REPLY ON

MOTION TO MOVE HEARING DATE

AND DENYING DEFENDANTS'

REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

(Docket No. 400)

On March 28, 2006, the Court issued an order denying Defendants' motion to continue the

hearing date on Ricoh's motion for sanctions. Thereafter, Defendants filed a reply brief and request

for reconsideration. As Defendants' reply is not authorized under Civil Local Rule 7-11 governing

motions for administrative relief, the reply and supporting declaration is hereby stricken from the

record(docket nos. 400 and 401). Furthermore, Defendants did not seek leave of Court to file the

request for reconsideration pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-9. Nevertheless, the Court has reviewed

Defendants' request for reconsideration, which is hereby DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 30, 2006 EDWARD M. CHEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:03-cv-04669-JW Document 413 Filed 03/30/06 Page 1 of 1