`14422
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`TOUCHSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC. et al.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`Lead Case No. 2:23-cv-00059-JRG-RSP
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`TOUCHSTREAM’S MOTION TO EXPEDITE BRIEFING REGARDING ITS
`MOTION TO STRIKE UNELECTED PRIOR ART EXHIBITS
`
`Touchstream respectfully files this Motion to Expedite the Briefing Schedule regarding its
`
`contemporaneously-filed Motion to Strike Unelected Prior Art Exhibits (the “Motion”). Pursuant
`
`to the deadline in the Docket Control Order for final narrowing of invalidity defenses, Charter
`
`dropped all prior-art based invalidity defenses on January 6, 2025. Touchstream subsequently
`
`requested removal of prior art exhibits from the Joint Exhibit List, and Charter refused. After
`
`several weeks of discussion and a telephonic meet and confer, the parties remain at impasse on the
`
`subject, and Touchstream seeks to raise the issue with the Court before trial commences.
`
`Trial in this matter is set for March 3, 2025. Under Local Rule CV-7(e), Charter has
`
`fourteen days from the date of service to file a response, meaning Charter’s response would be due
`
`a week after trial. Touchstream thus respectfully requests Charter respond to the Motion by
`
`Monday, February 24, 2025. Additionally, Touchstream recognizes that “[t]he court need not wait
`
`for the reply or sur-reply before ruling on the motion.” CV-7(f) and accordingly will not file a
`
`reply brief.
`
`
`
`Case 2:23-cv-00059-JRG-RSP Document 343 Filed 02/21/25 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:
`14423
`
`Touchstream conferred with Charter counsel, who stated they do not oppose this Motion
`
`to Expedite Briefing.
`
`
`
`Date: February 21, 2025
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Ryan Dykal ________
`Lead Counsel
`
`Ryan D. Dykal (pro hac vice)
`Jordan T. Bergsten (pro hac vice)
`Mark Schafer (pro hac vice)
`Philip A. Eckert (pro hac vice)
`Anita Liu (TX State Bar No. 24134054)
`BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
`1401 New York Ave, NW
`Washington, DC, DC 20005
`(t) 202-274-1109
`rdykal@bsfllp.com
`jbergsten@bsfllp.com
`mschafer@bsfllp.com
`peckert@bsfllp.com
`aliu@bsfllp.com
`
`John Michael Lyons (pro hac vice)
`Sabina Mariella (pro hac vice)
`Sophie Roytblat (pro hac vice)
`BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
`55 Hudson Yards, 20th Floor
`New York, NY 10001
`jlyons@bsfllp.com
`smariella@bsfllp.com
`sroytblat@bsfllp.com
`
`Rachel Martin (pro hac vice)
`BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
`333 Main Street
`Armonk, NY 10504
`rmartin@bsfllp.com
`
`
`Melissa Smith (TX State Bar No. 24001351)
`GILLAM & SMITH LLP
`303 S. Washington Ave.
`
`
`
`Case 2:23-cv-00059-JRG-RSP Document 343 Filed 02/21/25 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:
`14424
`
`Marshall, TX 75670
`(t) 903-934-8450
`melissa@gillamsmithlaw.com
`Andrew Thompson (“Tom”) Gorham (TX
`State Bar No. 24012715)
`McKellar L. Karr (TX State Bar No.
`24114356)
`GILLAM & SMITH LLP
`Tyler, TX 75702 (t) (903) 934-8540
`travis@gillamsmithlaw.com
`mckellar@gillamsmithlaw.com
`
` Counsel for Plaintiff Touchstream
` Technologies, Inc.
`
`CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
`
`Counsel for Touchstream has complied with the meet and confer requirement in Local
`
`Rule CV- 7(h) and confirm that this Motion is unopposed. Counsel for Touchstream, and
`
`counsel for Charter met and conferred by telephonic conference on the subject of this Motion
`
`on February 21, 2025. Counsel for Charter confirmed they do not oppose.
`
`Dated: February 21, 2025
`
`/s/ Ryan Dykal
`Ryan D. Dykal
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic
`
`service are being served this 21 day of February, 2025.
`
` Dated: February 21, 2025
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Ryan Dykal
`Ryan D. Dykal
`
`3
`
`
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
