T-MOBILE USA, INC. v. HUAWEI DEVICE USA, INC.

Case No. C14-1351-RAJ.

T-MOBILE USA, INC., Plaintiff, v. HUAWEI DEVICE USA, INC., et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity
Nature of Suit: 190 Contract: Other
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

T-Mobile USA Inc, Plaintiff, represented by Alison Plessman , HUESTON HENNIGAN LLP, pro hac vice.

T-Mobile USA Inc, Plaintiff, represented by Eric Hayden , HUESTON HENNIGAN LLP, pro hac vice, Jennifer Bunn Hayden , HUESTON HENNIGAN LLP, pro hac vice, John C. Hueston , HUESTON HENNIGAN LLP, pro hac vice, Majorie Alison Walter , KIPLING LAW GROUP PLLC, Moez M. Kaba , HUESTON HENNIGAN LLP, pro hac vice, Steven N. Feldman , HUESTON HENNINGAN LLP, pro hac vice, Xinlin Li , HUESTON HENNIGAN LLP, pro hac vice & Michael E. Kipling , KIPLING LAW GROUP PLLC.

Huawei Device USA Inc, Defendant, represented by James Hibey , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice, Jeffrey M. Theodore , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice, Jeffrey M. Thomas , GORDON TILDEN THOMAS & CORDELL LLP, Jessica I. Rothschild , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice, Li Guo , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice, Margaret P. Kammerud , STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP, pro hac vice, Michael J. Allan , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice, Michael E. Flynn-O'Brien , STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP, pro hac vice, Michael E. Stoll , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice, Nathaniel P. Garrett , JONES DAY, pro hac vice, Timothy C. Bickham , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, LLP, pro hac vice, William F. Abrams , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, LLP, pro hac vice & Franklin Dennis Cordell , GORDON TILDEN THOMAS & CORDELL LLP.

Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, Defendant, represented by James Hibey , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice, Jeffrey M. Theodore , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice, Jessica I. Rothschild , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice, Li Guo , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice, Margaret P. Kammerud , STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP, pro hac vice, Michael J. Allan , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice, Michael E. Flynn-O'Brien , STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP, pro hac vice & Michael E. Stoll , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, pro hac vice.

Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, Defendant, represented by Nathaniel P. Garrett , JONES DAY, pro hac vice.

Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, Defendant, represented by Timothy C. Bickham , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, LLP, pro hac vice, William F. Abrams , STEPTOE & JOHNSON, LLP, pro hac vice & Franklin Dennis Cordell , GORDON TILDEN THOMAS & CORDELL LLP.

OptoFidelity, LLC, Interested Party, Pro Se.


ORDER

RICHARD A. JONES, District Judge.

On February 10, 2017, the Court held a pretrial conference in the above captioned matter. In pre-conference email communications and/or at the conference itself, the parties raised several matters on an informal basis. The Court resolved these matters as follows.

First, Plaintiff T-Mobile USA, Inc. ("T-Mobile") requested that Defendant Huawei Device USA, Inc. ("Huawei") be precluded from calling Jin Zhou and Xuesong Yu as trial witnesses because they were not properly disclosed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. Because these proposed witnesses were not sufficiently disclosed, the Court granted T-Mobile's request. Accordingly, Huawei is precluded from calling these witnesses at trial.

Second, Huawei sought permission to obtain certain fact discovery from a foreign non-party located in Finland. Because discovery has long been closed and trial is imminent, the Court denied Huawei's request. Accordingly, further fact discovery is not permitted.

Third, T-Mobile requested twenty pages of further briefing on certain points of contention addressed in the parties' pretrial submissions. Huawei opposed this request. The Court finds that further, limited briefing is warranted. Accordingly, within seven (7) days from the date of this Order, the parties are each permitted to submit a brief not exceeding ten (10) pages to address these issues.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases