Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-00775/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-00775-16/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

1

 Docket Nos. 180, 182, 186, 189. Grecia previously dismissed his claims against ABC and

Google. Docket Nos. 91, 107, 111, 118. Defendant Walt Disney Company was eliminated when it

was not named in an amendment to the complaint. Docket No. 89. Grecia’s action against

Microsoft was transferred to the Western District of Washington. Docket No. 34, see also ECF

14-1220, Docket No. 58 (8/11 Hrg. Tr. at 10-11).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM GRECIA,

Plaintiff,

v.

APPLE INC., et al.,

Defendants

___________________________________/

Lead Case No. C-14-0775 EMC

CONSOLIDATED CASES

No. C-14-1194 EMC, Grecia v. Google, Inc.

No. C-14-0969 EMC, Grecia v. Sony Network

No. C-14-1220 EMC, Grecia v. VUDU, Inc.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Grecia’s Motion for Certification of Order under

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). The parties are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the

Court should not enter final judgment in this action and why the Rule 54(b) motion is not moot in

light of (1) the Court’s dismissal of Grecia’s claim against DECE with prejudice; and (2) the

settlement of Grecia’s claims against all other defendants in this action with prejudice.1

 See Duke

Energy Trading & Mktg., L.L.C. v. Davis, 267 F.3d 1042, 1049 (9th Cir. 2001) (holding effect of

Rule 41(a)(1)(i) dismissal of remaining defendant renders a previous order dismissing prior

defendant final for purposes of appellate jurisdiction); see also Gelboim v. Bank of Am. Corp., 135

S. Ct. 897, 906 (2015) (holding Rule 54(b) “does not apply [. . .] to a multiple claims action in which

Case 3:14-cv-00775-EMC Document 190 Filed 05/27/15 Page 1 of 2
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

2

all of the claims have been finally decided” (quoting Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Mackey, 351 U.S. 427,

435 (1956)). The parties should submit briefs not to exceed two pages by June 10, 2015. The Court

will enter judgment and vacate the Rule 54(b) motion as moot if no responsive papers are timely

filed or if the parties fail to show cause in their submissions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 27, 2015

_________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:14-cv-00775-EMC Document 190 Filed 05/27/15 Page 2 of 2