Parties Agree to 'Modest' Extension for Response to OpenAI Injunction Motion
OpenAI and defendants Open Artificial Intelligence and Guy Ravine, parties in a trademark infringement suit, conferred about a proposed modification to the briefing schedule on OpenAI’s motion for a preliminary injunction against the defendant, said their stipulation and proposed order…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
(docket 4:23-cv-03918) Monday in U.S. District Court for Northern California in Oakland. Plaintiff and defendants agree good cause exists to modify the time to oppose and reply to the motion for preliminary injunction; defendants’ counsel needs a “modest” amount of additional time to become familiar with the facts and legal theories relevant to the action and to prepare a response to the motion, the stipulation said. The proposed modification would result in all briefing on the motion, including the opposition and reply, being filed no later than 14 days before the hearing on Nov. 7, it said. The new briefing schedule would have defendants file and serve their opposition to OpenAI’s motion for preliminary injunction by Monday, with OpenAI’s reply brief due Oct. 24, it said. The preliminary injunction would enjoin Open Artificial Intelligence and its officers, employees and agents from “any and all development, production, promotion, sale and distribution of products or services that use the name “‘OpenAI,’ or any confusingly similar variant, including ‘Open AI,’” with a space between "Open" and "AI," said the September motion (see 2310020020).