U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2012

Synqor, Inc. v. Artesyn Technologies, Inc.

Synqor, Inc. v. Artesyn Technologies, Inc.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · Decided June 4, 2012

Synqor, Inc. v. Artesyn Technologies, Inc.

Opinion

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit SYNQOR, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, V. ARTESYN TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND ASTEC AMERICA, INC., Defendants-Appellants, AND BEL FUSE, INC., Defendant-Appellant, AND DELTA ELECTRON`ICS, INC., DELTA PRODUCTS CORP., AND POWER-ONE, INC., Defendants~Appellants, AND MURATA ELECTRONICS NORTH AMERICA, INC., MURATA MANUFACTURING CO., LTD., AND MURATA POWER SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendants-Appellants, AND CHEROKEE INTERNATIONAL CORP. AND LINEAGE POWER CORP., Defendants.

SYNQOR V. ARTESYN TECH 2 Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in case no. 07-CV-O497, Judge T. John Ward.

2011-1191, -1192, -1194, 2012-1070, -1071, -1072 ON MOTION ORDER The Bel Fuse, lnc. moves to withdraw Kenneth P. Kula as counsel. Artesyn Technologies, lnc. et al. (Arte- syn) move for a 228-day extension of time, until June 28, 2012, to file their reply briefs. SynQor, Inc. consents to a 14-day extension of time, but otherwise opposed the motion. Artesyn replies.

Upon consideration thereof, IT Is ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion to withdraw counsel is granted. (2) The motion for an extension of time is granted to the extent that Artesyn is granted a 17-day extension of time to file their reply briefs. No more extensions CC§ FoR THE CoURT 4 /s/ J an Horbaly Date J an Horbaly Clerk Donald R. Dunner, Esq.

Constantine L. Tre1a, Jr., Esq.

Alan D. Smith, Esq.

F|LED U.s. cnun‘r or APPEALS Fon THE FE¢JEHAL c:nculi JUN 04 2012 JAN HURBALY CLEHK

William F. Lee, Esq.

Andrew J. Pincus, Esq.

SYNQOR v . ARTESYN TECH

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