The court denied defendant's motion to extend the deadline for filing its invalidity contentions until after plaintiff served its infringement contentions on its related corporate entity that was served later in this action. "[Defendant] is a party separate from the [late-served defendant]. Had the Plaintiff decided to dismiss the [late-served defendant] from this lawsuit, [the earlier-served defendant] would still be required to timely file its invalidity contentions, regardless of who manufactures the accused products or possesses the prior art references."
Caliper Life Sciences, Inc. v. Shimadzu Corporation et al., 4-09-cv-00034
(TXED July 16, 2009, Order) (Schell, J.)