Defendants' motion for more definite preliminary infringement contentions was denied. "[T]his Court finds that the traditional mechanism of serving interrogatory requests is sufficient to narrow the issues and determine the infringement contentions in this case. [Defendants] had ample time in the Eastern District of Texas, under their governing patent local rules, to move for more definite PICs. Instead, [defendants] chose to transfer the case to the Central District of California, and [they] can no longer look to the rules of a district [they] sought to leave."
Aten International Co. Ltd.. v. Emine Technology Co., Ltd., 8-09-cv-00843 (CACD March 29, 2010, Order) (Guilford, J.)