Philips North America LLC v. Summit Imaging Inc

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 10 PHILIPS NORTH AMERICA, LLC, CASE NO. C19-1745JLR et al., 11 ORDER GRANTING MOTION Plaintiffs, FOR LEAVE TO FILE 12 v. SURREPLY SUMMIT IMAGING, INC., et al., Defendants.

This matter comes before the court on Defendants Summit Imaging, Inc., and Lawrence R. Nguyen’s (collectively, “Summit”) motion for leave to file a surreply. (Mot. (Dkt. # 55).) Summit requests leave to file a three-page surreply for the sole purpose of responding to Plaintiffs Philips North America, LLC, Koninklijke Philips N.V., and Philips India, Ltd.’s (collectively, “Philips”) arguments based on Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm, Inc., 969 F.3d 974 (9th Cir. 2020) (“Qualcomm”). (Mot. at 2; see Reply (Dkt. # 54) at 4 (quoting Qualcomm, 969 F.3d at 993, 995).)

1 Because Qualcomm was issued the day after Summit filed its opposition to Philips’s motion, Summit did not have the opportunity to address that case in its opposition. (See Mot. at 2; see also Resp. (Dkt. #53).) Philips has not opposed Summit’s motion for leave to file a surreply. (See generally Dkt.)

5 Having considered the motion, the relevant portions of the record, and the applicable law, the court GRANTS Summit’s motion for leave to file a surreply (Dkt. # 55). Summit shall file a surreply of no more than three pages in length by no later than November 5, 2020. Summit’s surreply shall be strictly limited to responding to Philips’s arguments regarding the applicability of Qualcomm to Summit’s antitrust counter-claim based on Philips’s alleged refusal to deal. (See Dkt. # 54 at 4.)

11 Dated this 30th day of October, 2020.

A 14 JAMES L. ROBART United States District Judge