Calypso Wireless (fka CLYW)

[conagra]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

CALYPSO WIRELESS, INC. & DRAGO DAIC,
Plaintiffs-Counterclaim Defendants,
v.
T-MOBILE USA, INC.,
Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

Case No. 2:08-cv-441-TJW-CE
Jury Trial Demanded
UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER CALYPSO WIRELESS, INC.’S SECOND AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT

Defendant T-Mobile USA, Inc. (“T-Mobile”), by its attorneys, respectfully requests an extension of time to answer the Second Amended and Supplemental Complaint of Plaintiff Calypso Wireless, Inc. (“Calypso”). Because Calypso has indicated that the pleading will be superseded by a new Complaint, the parties have agreed as follows:

1. Calypso filed a motion for leave to file its Second Amended Complaint on January 13, 2010, seeking to add cross-claims against its co-Plaintiff, Drago Daic, and third-party claims against Jimmy Williamson, P.C. (“Williamson”) and Kelly Stephens, a trustee to whom Daic and Williamson had allegedly assigned the patent. (D.I. 88).

2. The Court granted Calypso’s motion on January 25, 2010. (D.I. 101). Calypso filed its Second Amended Complaint that day. (D.I. 103).

3. On February 2, 2010, plaintiffs Calypso and Daic, as well as third-party defendant Williamson, filed a joint stipulation that provided, among other things, that Calypso intended to withdraw its cross-claims against its co-plaintiff Daic, and its third-party claims against Williamson and Stephens. (D.I. 111 ¶ 5).

4. Calypso, Daic, and Williamson also stipulated Williamson would be added a plaintiff to this action “on a motion to be filed by Calypso and/or jointly by Calypso, Daic and/or Williamson P.C.” (D.I. 111 ¶ 4).

5. Accordingly, Calypso has indicated that its Second Amended and Supplemental Complaint will be superseded, and Plaintiffs have stated their intention to file a new pleading, adding Williamson as a plaintiff.

6. Pursuant to Rule 12(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, T-Mobile’s answer to Calypso’s Second Amended and Supplemental Complaint is due on February 16, 2010. Plaintiffs have not yet filed their motion to add Williamson as a Plaintiff or otherwise formally withdrawn Calypso’s Second Amended and Supplemental Complaint.

7. Accordingly, T-Mobile has requested, and Calypso and Daic have agreed, to extend T-Mobile’s time to file a response to Calypso’s Second Amended Complaint for 14 days.

8. Accordingly, T-Mobile hereby makes an unopposed motion to extend its time to answer Calypso’s Second Amended and Supplemental Complaint for 14 days. This is the first such request for relief T-Mobile has made with respect to the Second Amended and Supplemental Complaint.

Dated: February 16, 2010 Respectfully submitted,
/s/Anne Champion
Josh A. Krevitt, N.Y. Bar 2568228
Benjamin Hershkowitz, N.Y. Bar 2600559
Anne Champion, N.Y. Bar 4425237
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
200 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10166
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant T-Mobile USA, Inc.
2
Case 2:08-cv-00441-TJW-CE Document 114 Filed 02/16/2010 Page 2 of 3