Doc 350 pasted below:

Plaintiff e.Digital Corporation (“e.Digital”), pursuant to MSK Civ. Practice Standard V.F.1, respectfully submits this Motion for Forthwith Hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Preclude Defendants from Offering Non-Rebuttal Testimony From Their Designated Rebuttal Expert at Markman Hearing. In support of this Motion, e.Digital shows the Court as follows:

CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTATION

Pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(a), counsel for e.Digital conferred with counsel for Defendants regarding the instant motion in telephone conferences on January 5, 2011 that were attended by counsel on behalf of all parties except Sakar. During the conferences participating defense counsel confirmed that they oppose the relief being sought in e.Digital’s Motion to Preclude, but that they agree with e.Digital’s request that the underlying Motion be resolved on an expedited basis and in advance of the January 28, 2011 Markman Hearing.

GROUNDS FOR MOTION

e.Digital in its Motion to Preclude Defendants from Offering Non-Rebuttal Testimony From Their Designated Rebuttal Expert at Markman Hearing, moves the Court to preclude Defendants’ rebuttal expert from offering non-rebuttal testimony at the Markman hearing. And because e.Digital does not intend to offer any expert testimony at the Markman hearing, there is no need for the Court to hear any testimony from Defendants’ rebuttal expert. The resolution of e.Digital’s Motion to Preclude will significantly impact the length of the Markman hearing and the parties’ preparation for that hearing, which is scheduled to take place in a little more than three weeks. Therefore, the parties and the Court have a significant interest in resolving e.Digital’s Motion before the January 28 Markman hearing so that the Court can allocate less time for the hearing, if appropriate, and the parties can streamline their presentations of live testimony at the hearing. Otherwise, if this rather straightforward issue is not resolved in advance of the January 28 Markman hearing, the parties would need to prepare for the eventuality that Dr. Mihran may testify and the Court would need to consider e.Digital’s objections to such testimony at the hearing itself.

WHEREFORE, e.Digital respectfully requests a forthwith hearing and/or expedited resolution of Plaintiff’s Motion to Preclude Defendants from Offering Non-Rebuttal Testimony From Their Designated Rebuttal Expert at Markman Hearing in advance of that hearing.

Respectfully Submitted,

Dated: January 5, 2011

FAEGRE & BENSON, LLP