Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/cod;;1:16-cv-01005_de176> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 7 of
7
with 100 items per page.
- cod;;1:16-cv-01005_de176 RegisterActionDate "2019-07-26" @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-01005_de176 RegisterActionDescriptionText "ORDER GRANTING IN PART 176 Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of the Court's Word Limit. Defendants seek leave to exceed the Court's 2,700-word limit in reply in support of their post-trial motion 138 , citing "the number of claims, parties, and issues to be addressed" and the need "to provide in-depth analysis of several cases cited by the Plaintiff in order to explain why those authorities are not controlling or persuasive." The Court recognizes that its Practice Standards were published after Defendants' motion and Plaintiff's response 165 were filed, and that both the motion and the response contain ~12,500 words. Accordingly, an enlargement of the word limitation for Defendants' reply brief is warranted; the Court, however, is unconvinced that 9,000 words are necessary. Accordingly, Defendants' motion is granted in part, and their reply brief shall not exceed 6,500 words. SO ORDERED by Judge Daniel D. Domenico on 7/26/2019. Text Only Entry (dddlc1, ) Modified on 7/31/2019 to correct text (athom, ). (Entered: 07/26/2019)" @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-01005_de176 AdministrativeID "177" @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-01005_de176 OntologyLabel order @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-01005_de176 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:16-cv-01005_de137 @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-01005_de176 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:16-cv-01005_de164 @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-01005_de176 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:16-cv-01005_de175 @default.