1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WACO DIVISION 

WSOU INVESTMENTS LLC D/B/A 

BRAZOS LICENSING AND 

DEVELOPMENT, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

ZTE CORPORATION, ZTE (USA) INC. 

AND ZTE (TX), INC., 

 Defendants. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00487-ADA 

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00488-ADA 

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00489-ADA 

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00490-ADA 

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00491-ADA 

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00492-ADA 

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00493-ADA 

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00494-ADA 

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00495-ADA 

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00496-ADA 

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00497-ADA 

STATUS REPORT REGARDING PENDING VENUE MOTIONS 

Pursuant to the Court’s March 23, 2021 Standing Order Regarding Motion for InterDistrict Transfer (“Standing Order”), Defendants ZTE Corporation (“ZTE Corp.”), ZTE (USA) 

Inc. (“ZTA”), and ZTE (TX), Inc. (“ZTX”) (collectively “ZTE”) provide the following status 

report regarding the pending venue-related motions with respect to the eleven separate pending 

suits filed by Plaintiff WSOU Investments LLC D/B/A Brazos Licensing and Development 

(“WSOU”)1: 

1. On October 9, 2020, Defendants ZTE Corp., ZTA, and ZTX Moved to Dismiss 

and/or Transfer to the Northern District of Texas (“NDTX”). Dkt. Nos. 23-27 (the “First Motion 

to Dismiss”). WSOU then, on November 6, 2020, simultaneously filed responses to the First 

Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. Nos. 36-37), and filed an Amended Complaint (Dkt. Nos. 38-39). As 

1 There are 11 pending cases. Citations throughout refer to new WDTX Case Nos. -00487 through 

-00497, and specific citations reference to the docket for WDTX Case No. -00487.

Case 6:20-cv-00487-ADA Document 66 Filed 04/02/21 Page 1 of 4
2 

such, Defendants filed an unopposed extension requesting “that the deadlines to respond to the 

Amended Complaint (with a new Motion to Dismiss or otherwise) . . . be extended to December 

4, 2020.” Dkt. No. 41. The Court granted the extension on November 12, 2020. Despite filing the 

Amended Complaint and despite the granted extension for the new Motion to Dismiss, however, 

WSOU insisted that the First Motion to Dismiss was not mooted by the Amended Complaint, 

and further insisted on continued briefing of the First Motion to Dismiss. Dkt. No. 42. As such, 

Defendants filed their reply on November 20, 2020. Dkt. No. 42; see also Dkt. Nos. 43, 46, and 

48 (WSOU seeking leave for sur-reply brief). 

2. Then, on December 4, 2020, Defendants ZTA and ZTX again Moved to Dismiss 

for Improper Venue, or in the alternate, transfer to the NDTX, in view of the Amended 

Complaint. Dkt. No. 47 (the “Second Motion to Dismiss”); see also December 12, 2020 Order 

(striking in part Motion to Transfer). Through electronic communication WSOU sought venue 

discovery, and on December 15, 2020, the Court granted venue discovery through June 4, 2021. 

3. Venue discovery is ongoing as WSOU seeks discovery from multiple entities—

including third parties (such as Cincinnati Bell Long Distance; Cincinnati Bell Technology 

Solutions LLC; Cincinnati Bell Wireless, LLC; Hiliary Communications LLC; Cintex Wireless, 

LLC; and Commnet of Texas LLC), which are all unaffiliated with Defendants. As for the 

Defendants, WSOU will depose a representative from ZTX on April 13, 2021, and will depose a 

representative from ZTA on April 14, 2021. See also March 24, 2021 Discovery Hearing order. 

4. On October 30, 2020, the Court initially scheduled a Markman hearing in these 

cases for May 20-21, 2021. Dkt. No. 31. These May 20-21, 2021 Markman hearing dates remain 

unchanged despite WSOU’s November 6, 2020 Amended Complaint filing and despite the 

granted venue discovery for the Second Motion to Dismiss extending through June 4, 2021. 

Case 6:20-cv-00487-ADA Document 66 Filed 04/02/21 Page 2 of 4
3 

5. Further, on December 30, 2020, given the current schedule, Defendants moved to 

stay the cases, pending resolution of the pending Second Motion to Dismiss. Dkt. No. 49. WSOU 

filed an opposition on January 6, 2021. Dkt. No. 50. And Defendants filed a reply on January 13, 

2021. Dkt. No. 51. Defendants’ Motion to Stay is therefore ready for resolution. 

In conclusion, the Markman hearing for these cases is scheduled for May 20-21, 2021, 

which is several weeks before the conclusion of the venue discovery in the cases on June 4, 2021 

(and the remaining briefing for the Second Motion to Dismiss). Thus, as outlined in the pending 

Motion to Stay (which is ripe for resolution), Dkt. No. 49, and in accordance with the Standing 

Order and Federal Circuit mandate/precedent,2

 Defendants again respectfully request that all 

issues unrelated to venue be stayed, pending the outcome of the Second Motion to Dismiss. 

DATED: April 2, 2021 Respectfully submitted, 

 

/s/Lionel M. Lavenue 

Lionel M. Lavenue 

Virginia Bar No. 49,005 

lionel.lavenue@finnegan.com 

FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, 

GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP 

 1875 Explorer Street, Suite 800 

 

2 See In re TracFone Wireless, Inc., 2021-118, 2021 WL 865353 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 8, 2021) 

(district courts must give venue motions “top priority before resolving the substantive issues in 

the case”); see also See In re Apple, 979 F.3d 1332, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2020) (resolution of venue 

issues should “unquestionably take top priority” in a case); and In re SK Hynix Inc., No. 2021-

113, 2021 WL 321071, at *1 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 1, 2021) (prioritization of venue considerations). 

Case 6:20-cv-00487-ADA Document 66 Filed 04/02/21 Page 3 of 4
4 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 The undersigned hereby certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have 

consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court’s 

CM/ECF system on April 2, 2021. 

/s/Lionel M. Lavenue 

 Lionel M. Lavenue 

Case 6:20-cv-00487-ADA Document 66 Filed 04/02/21 Page 4 of 4