`Case 1:23-cv-08926-SHS Document 107 Filed 02/09/24 Page 1 of 1
`
`Debevoise
`& Plimpton
`
`Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
`66 Hudson Boulevard
`New York, NY 10001
`+1212 909 6000
`
`February 9, 2024
`
`BY ECF
`
`Hon.Sidney H.Stein
`United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
`500 Pearl St.
`New York, New York 10007
`
`Atari Interactive, Inc. vy. Printify, Inc. et al., 23-cv-08926 (SHS) (KHP)
`
`Dear JudgeStein:
`
`Defendants Printify, Inc. and Janis Berdigans(collectively, “Printify”) respectfully request
`oral argument on Atari’s Motion to Dismiss Printify’s Counterclaim (ECF No. 93; the “Motion to
`Dismiss”).
`
`Printify acknowledges that the Court’s Individual Rule 2(F) ordinarily requires parties to
`request oral argumentat the time their papers are filed. However,in light of Atari’s substantive
`reframing ofits timeliness argument to acknowledge(for the first time on reply) the provisions of
`the 2020 Trademark Modernization Act, Printify believes oral argument would aid the Court in
`addressing the scope of 15 U.S.C. § 1127 andits subparts, as well as any other issues raised in the
`parties’ briefing on which the Court has questions.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Megan K. Bannigan
`Megan K. Bannigan
`Kathryn C. Saba
`Grace McLaughlin
`Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
`66 Hudson Boulevard
`New York, New York, 10001
`Telephone: (212) 909-6000
`
`Christopher S. Ford
`Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
`650 California Street
`San Francisco, CA 94108
`Telephone: (415) 738-5700
`
`Counselfor Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs
`Printify, Inc. and Janis Berdigans
`
`cc
`
`All counsel of record (via ECF)
`
`www.debevoise.com
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
