Plaintiff's motion to require defendant's compliance with the claim construction deadline was granted. "Like many litigants, but unlike this Court, [defendant] seems to believe that a request for adjournment, if only it can be filed sufficiently belatedly, somehow is self-granting, as [defendant] proceeded to act as if its defective presentation of a discovery dispute excused it from serving the claims construction report that it was obligated to serve under the Court's orders. . . . This behavior will not be tolerated. [Plaintiff] is hereby ordered to serve its claim construction document . . . [in three days] on pain of sanctions."
Liquidnet Holdings, Inc. v. Pulse Trading, Inc., 1-07-cv-06886 (NYSD February 23, 2009, Order)