3:22-cv-01852•Netskope, Inc. v. Fortinet, Inc.
Full text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA NETSKOPE, INC., Plaintiff, v. FORTINET, INC., Defendant. Case No. 22-cv-01852-TLT (AGT) ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE MO- TION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR BRIEFING Re: Dkt. No. 215 On November 14, 2025, Fortinet moved for leave to supplement its infringement contentions, pursuant to Patent Local Rule 3-6. Dkt. 213. Fortinet concurrently filed an administrative motion to shorten the briefing schedule or, alternatively, to extend the fact discovery deadline by several months. Dkt. 215. Today, Judge Thompson referred Fortinet’s motions to the undersigned and ordered that “a further extension of fact discovery is not necessary regardless of whether Fortinet is granted leave to amend.” Dkt. 216. Netskope opposes Fortinet’s motion to shorten the briefing schedule. Dkt. 218. Based on the papers, Fortinet’s request for an order shortening time is DENIED. The parties shall submit briefing on the motion for leave to amend as scheduled per the local rules: Netskope’s response is due by November 28, 2025, and any reply from Fortinet is due by December 5, 2025. The hearing date is set for December 19, 2025, in person, unless otherwise ordered by the Court. Case 3:22-cv-01852-TLT Document 219 Filed 11/18/25 Page 1 of 2
2 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 18, 2025 ______________________________ Alex G. Tse United States Magistrate Judge Case 3:22-cv-01852-TLT Document 219 Filed 11/18/25 Page 2 of 2
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.