U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2011

Presidio Components, Inc. v. American Technical Ceramics Corp.

Presidio Components, Inc. v. American Technical Ceramics Corp.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · Decided June 30, 2011

Presidio Components, Inc. v. American Technical Ceramics Corp.

Opinion

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential United States Court of AppeaIs for the FederaI Circuit PRESIDIO COMPONENTS, INC., Plaintiff-Cross Appe£lcm,t, , V. AMERICAN TECHNICAL CERAMICS CORP., Defendo;nt-Appellant. ' 2010-1355, 2011-1089 § .

Appeals from the United States DiStrict Court for the Southern District of Ca1ifornia in case no. 08-CV-O335, Chief Judge luna E. Gonzalez..

ON MOTION Before NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.

0 R D E R American Teohnical Ceramics Corp. (ATCC) moves for leave to exceed the permitted word limitation for its principal brief by filing a brief of up to 17,164 words.* In ° ATCC originally requested leave to file an opening brief of up to 1'7,826 words However, the opening brief it filed was 17,164 w0rds.

PRESIDIO COMPONENTS V. AMERICAN TECH 2 the alternative ATCC moves for leave to exceed the word limitation on the condition that ATCC’s total word count from its two briefs does not exceed 28,000 words, which is the amount allowed under the rules for the appellant's briefs when added together. ATCC states that Presidio Components, Inc. (Presidio) consents on the condition that Presidio is also granted leave to exceed the word limita- tion in its opening brief. Presidio moves for an extension of time, until August 20, 2011, to file its opening brief.

Upon consideration thereof IT ls 0RI)ERED THAT: (1) The motion to exceed the permitted word limita- tion is granted to the extent that ATCC's opening brief of 17,164 words may be filed. ATCC's response/reply brief may not exceed 10,836 words. Presidio may likewise exceed the word limitation for its opening brief by up to 3,164 words, provided that its opening brief and reply brief together do not exceed the total of 23,500 words permitted by the rules for a cross-appellant. (2) Presidio’s motion for an extension of time is granted FOR THE COURT rm 3 0 fs/ J an Horbaly Date J an Horbaly Clerk cc: Brett A. Schatz, Esq. l\/[arvin S. Gittes, Esq. ,_S_c0URH)',;EPPEA,_5 mg THE FFnmn.1 rt!sr‘.1JtT s JUN 30 2011 ms nassau CLEHK »¢3“s&‘a¢ss»ra»!a\1~»-

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.