Judge Gayles (SDFL) denies the #Birdrock motion for fees, finding that Birdrock isn't a prevailing party, that this isn't an exceptional case, and that "Plaintiff has not engaged in unreasonable or vexatious conduct."

But he rule that Birdrock is entitled to recover the money posted as a bond due to "Plaintiff's lack of diligence in identifying Birdrock as a party and restraining its assets."

The bond is $10k.

#DesignPatents #ScheduleA

Looks like the cormorants have formed a council on the high rock, the pelicans are staying clear, they know this will not end well.

#birds #birdStories #birdRock #marinHeadlands #cormorants

Okay, so we've seen #ScheduleA plaintiffs argue that a defendant is lying about its own location before. See, e.g., the Austin, Texas arguments in the #BirdRock case.

But wow. This is....a choice:

(For prior discussions of this case, check the #BirdRock hashtag.)
XYZ Corporation v. The Individuals, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on..., 1:22-cv-24270 - CourtListener.com

Docket for XYZ Corporation v. The Individuals, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on..., 1:22-cv-24270 — Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information.

CourtListener
File:"Bird Rock" - Cape St. Mary's Ecological Reserve, Newfoundland 2019-08-10.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

BirdRock has filed its reply in support of its motion for fees: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.626222/gov.uscourts.flsd.626222.69.0.pdf

"It is now apparent from its responses to the Motions, including Plaintiff’s counsel’s new declaration—that Plaintiff’s representations that BirdRock was a Chinese infringer—was not based upon good cause. Instead, it was based solely on Plaintiff’s bias, stereotypes and unfounded assumptions."

For more on this case & BirdRock's motion, see: #BirdRock

#DesignPatents #ScheduleA #ScheduleAFightsBack

Transcript Order – #663 in In re: Google Play Store Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal., 3:21-md-02981) – CourtListener.com

Transcript Order

CourtListener
Transcript Order – #663 in In re: Google Play Store Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal., 3:21-md-02981) – CourtListener.com

Transcript Order

CourtListener

This brief is really good: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.626222/gov.uscourts.flsd.626222.56.0.pdf

It remains to be seen whether this judge will be moved or, as in #GorgeDesign, will just reject it all out of hand.

#BirdRock #ScheduleA

Transcript Order – #663 in In re: Google Play Store Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal., 3:21-md-02981) – CourtListener.com

Transcript Order

CourtListener