Finjan, LLC v. Qualys Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 FINJAN, INC., CASE NO. 4:18-cv-07229-YGR

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING RELIEF FROM

vs. MAGISTRATE JUDGE ORDER

QUALYS INC., Re: Dkt. No. 114 Defendant.

11 Now before the Court is Finjan, Inc’s motion for relief from the Magistrate Judge Order dated September 17, 2020. (Dkt. No. 114.) Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), the court must “modify or set aside any part of the [magistrate judge] order that is clearly erroneous or is contrary to law.” Under Civil Local Rule 72-2, the motion may be denied at any time, including when the court does not deny or set a briefing schedule within 14 days of the filing. In light of the time elapsed, Finjan presumably knows that the motion has been denied. The Court writes to confirm as much. Finjan argues that Magistrate Judge Hixson erred in denying discovery of overseas sales because some of the claims are for a “computer-readable medium.” As Judge Hixson…