Ronald a Katz Tech. v. American Air

1.¢1_,._.__.._.____:1 _ NOTE: This order is n0nprecedeI1tial.

United States Court of AppeaIs for the FederaI Circuit

IN RE KATZ INTERACT]VE CALL PROCESSING PATENT LITIGATION

RONALD A. KATZ TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LP, Pla1`n.tiff-Appellant,

V.

AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.,

Defencicmt-Appellee, _ and

FEDEX CORPORATE SERVICES, INC., FEDEX

CORPORATION,

FEDEX CUSTOMER INFORMATION SERVI CES,

INC., and FEDERAL EXPRESS CORFORATION,

Defendan,ts-Appellees, and

DHL EXPRESS (USA), INC., DHL HOLDINGS (USA) INC., and SKY COURIER, INC.,

Defendants-Appellees, and

U.S. BANCORP and U.S. BANK NATIONAL

ASSOCIATION,

Defen,dar,ts-Appellees.

RONALD A KATZ TECH v. AMERICAN A.IR 2 and

TIME WARNER CABLE, INC., TIME WARNER

ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY, L.P.,

TIME WARNER NY CABLE LLC, AOL, LLC,

COMPUSERVE INTERACTIVE

SERVICES, INC., NETSCAPE COMMUNICATIONS CORP.,

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS ENTERTAlNMENT

I LLC,

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDING

COMPANY LLC,

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING LLC, and CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,

Defendcmts, and

CSC HOLDINGS, INC. (NOW KNOWN AS CSC

HOLDINGS, LLC), CABLEVISION SYSTEMS

CORPORATION, CABLEVISION SYSTEMS NEW

YORK CITY CORPORATION,

CABLEVISION OF BROOKHAVEN, INC.,

CABLEVISION OF CONNECTICUT

CORPORATION, CABLEVISION OF HUDSON

COUNTY, INC.,

CABLEVISION OF LITCHFIELD, INC.,

CABLEVISION OF MONMOUTH, INC.,

CABLEVISION OF NEW JERSEY, INC.,

CABLEVISION OF OAKLAND LLC, and CABLEVISION OF ROCKLANDlRAMAPO LLC, Defendan.ts-Appellees, and

TDS METROCOM LLC, TDS

TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION, and UNITED STATES CELLULAR CORPORATION, Defen.dants.

3 RONALD A KATZ TECH V. AMERICAN A.lR

2009-1450, -145l, -1452, -1468, -1469, 2010-1017 Appeals from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in case nos. 2:07-ML-1816, 07-CV-2192, 07-CV-2196, 07-CV-2360, and 07-CV-213-4, Judge R. Gary Klausner.

ON MOTION

Before LOUR1E, Circuit Judge.

0 R D E R

The appellees move without opposition for leave to file a joint response to Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing LP’s (Katz) motion to strike that is contained in Katz’s reply brief. Katz does not oppose and separately moves without opposition for leave to file a reply if the appellees motion is granted Katz also moves for judicial notice of a district court order in a related case. The document is attached to the motion for judicial notice.

Upon consideration thereof

I'r ls 0RoEREo THAT: (1) The appellees motion is granted (2) Katz’s motion for leave to reply is granted to the extent that Katz may Ele a response, not to exceed four pages, within seven calendar days of the date of filing of this order. (3) Katz’s motion for judicial notice is granted.

RONALD A KATZ TECH V. AMERICAN AIR

K (4) A copy of this order, the appellees’ response, and atz’s response shall be transmitted to the merits panel assigned to hear these cases

FoR THE CoUR'r ' ' /s/ J an Horbaly

AllG 12 ZIl10~ o t

A___DL5.-'_i\jr{¢¢‘_.:, -- J an Horbaly< Clerk ocr Frank V. Pietrantonio, Esq.

S

Mike Mckool, Jr., Esq. u.s_ con

§§:\

11 r- ?:;m

D

PPEALs ron

J0Sh A_ 1<y@vm;, Esq. ""E F C#RCwT

Adam T. Bernstein, Esq. 12 mm

Christopher S. Ruhland, Esq.

Kara F. Stoll, Esq. l im HoRBAl-l

Jonathan R. Spivey, Esq.