The attorneys for the defendant are late "for some reason' on more than one issue.

First off, the firm of Jones Day defending Micron are not new to defending against e.Digital. They have known of e.Digital for some time now.

1. They filed late for a stay of civil proceedings regarding a proposed contestable issue....where the court denied....as being too late.

2. They filed late with the PTO for a proposed contestable issue in the way of an IPR...(under review)

3. They filed information improperly regarding a proposed contestable issue.

4. They are currently filing late with a proposed issue of new discovery....

"Indeed, the Defendants have done nothing to help themselves or diminish the prejudice to e.Digital."

"They have not updated their responses to discovery already propounded to include interrogatory responses, their initial disclosures, and their responses to document requests to provide any information or documentation concerning their newly alleged inequitable conduct defense."

"They have, in fact, taken the position that they have no duty to supplement certain discovery responses or provide any new documents or information previously requested by e.Digital. "

"This is so even though the Plaintiffs have requested such updates from Defendants and, at least in part, Defendants have promised to supplement certain previous discovery responses."

"This is so even though the Defendants have an obligation to do so under the law in a timely manner once they learned that in some material respect their disclosures or responses were incomplete or incorrect pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 26(e)(1)(A)."

Being late and ignore responsibility is Jones Days defense and game plan....

doni