Fidelity National Financial, Inc. v. Attachmate Corporation
Plaintiff: Fidelity National Financial, Inc.
Defendant: Attachmate Corporation
Case Number: 3:2015cv01400
Filed: November 23, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Office: Jacksonville Office
County: Duval
Presiding Judge: Harvey E. Schlesinger
Presiding Judge: Joel B. Toomey
Nature of Suit: Copyrights
Cause of Action: 17 U.S.C. ยง 101
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
April 19, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 129 ORDERED: The Court grants 111 Fidelity's motion for extensions of time. The parties must conduct all depositions by May 12, 2017; must provide responsive expert disclosures within two weeks after the responding party deposes the opposing p arty's expert; and must provide rebuttal expert disclosures within three weeks after issuance of the response expert reports. The Court grants 113 Fidelity's unopposed motion to provisionally file documents under seal; directs Fidelity to file the exhibits under seal by April 28, 2017, by delivering them to the clerk in a sealed envelope with a copy of this order; and directs Attachmate, by May 5, 2017, to file either a motion to seal or a notice informing the Court it does not wish to keep the documents under seal. If Attachmate files no motion to seal, Fidelity must file the documents on the public docket by May 12, 2017. The Court denies 104 Fidelity's motion to compel without prejudice to filing a similar motion afte r deposing Attachmate's corporate representatives and clarifying its requests. The Court grants 106 Attachmate's first motion to compel to the extent the Court directs Fidelity to supplement its answers to interrogatories within 14 days a fter taking relevant depositions and denies the motion as moot to the extent it seeks an order directing Fidelity and Black Knight to provide objections to deposition topics. The Court denies in part 116 Attachmate's second motion to compel to the extent the Court will not compel Fidelity and Black Knight to prepare deponents on identified topics but grants in part the motion to the extent Attachmate may attempt to narrow the topics. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia D. Barksdale on 4/19/2017. (BGK)
November 7, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 86 ORDER granting 82 Attachmate Corporation's unopposed motion to maintain its "compliance portal" under seal and directing the clerk, absent further order, to maintain the seal until November 30, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia D. Barksdale on 11/7/2016. (BGK)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Fidelity National Financial, Inc. v. Attachmate Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Fidelity National Financial, Inc.
Represented By: Tamarah Eve Brodsky
Represented By: Kaitlyn J. Marschke
Represented By: Thomas E. Mixdorf
Represented By: Stephen E. Reynolds
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Attachmate Corporation
Represented By: Jaime Rich Vining
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?