`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`SMART RF INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`AT&T MOBILITY LLC,
`Defendant,
`
`SMART RF INC.,
` Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`PARTNERSHIP
`CELLCO
`VERIZON WIRELESS,
`Defendant,
`
`D/B/A
`
`SMART RF INC.,
` Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`T-MOBILE USA, INC. et al.,
`Defendants,
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`CASE NO. 2:24-cv-00195-JRG
`(Lead Case)
`
`CASE NO. 2:24-cv-00196-JRG
`(Member Case)
`
`CASE NO. 2:24-cv-00197-JRG
`(Member Case)
`
`ORDER
`Before the Court is Movant-Intervenor Ericsson Inc.’s (“Ericsson”) Unopposed Motion for
`
`Leave to Intervene (the “Motion”). (Dkt. No. 46.) In the Motion, Ericsson requests leave to
`
`intervene in the above-captioned case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. (“Rule”) 24(a) or, in the
`
`alternative, Rule 24(b). (Id. at 1-2.) Ericsson further represents that this Motion is unopposed. (Id.
`
`at 1.) Ericsson filed with the Motion Ericsson’s Answer in Intervention (Dkt. Nos. 47, 48, 49) in
`
`compliance with Rule 24(c).
`
`PETITIONERS EXHIBIT 1032
`Page 1 of 2
`
`
`
`Case 2:24-cv-00195-JRG Document 56 Filed 08/08/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 529
`
`Having considered the Motion, and noting its unopposed nature, the Court finds that it
`
`should be and hereby is GRANTED. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Ericsson is permitted to
`
`intervene in the above-captioned case pursuant to Rule 24(a) or, in the alternative, Rule 24(b).
`
`
`
`
`.
`
`____________________________________
`RODNEY GILSTRAP
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`So ORDERED and SIGNED this 8th day of August, 2024.
`
`PETITIONERS EXHIBIT 1032
`Page 2 of 2
`
`