Sofpool, LLC v. KMart Corporation et al

Filing 76

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 9/13/12 ORDERING that Plaintiff and Defendants, by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and agree to a 40 page limit or less when images are incorporated, but which does not exceed 30 pages without such images, subject to the Courts approval. (Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6

PAUL L. GALE (SBN 065873)
[e-mail]
SIAVASH DANIEL RASHTIAN (SBN 228644)
[e-mail]
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
5 Park Plaza, Suite 1400
Irvine, CA 92614-2545
Telephone:
949.622.2700
Facsimile:
949.622.2739
Attorneys for Defendants KMART CORPORATION
and BIG LOTS STORES, INC.

7
8
9
10

SUITE 1400

I R V I N E , CA 9 2 6 1 4 - 2 5 4 5

5 PARK PLAZA

T ROUTMAN S ANDERS LLP

11

John P. Costello (SBN 16111)
COSTELLO LAW CORPORATION
331 J Street, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone:
916.441.2234
Facsimile:
916.441.4254
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SOFPOOL LLC

12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

16
17

SOFPOOL LLC, a limited liability
company,

18

Case No. CV 10-03333 LKK (JFMx)
Hon. Lawrence K. Karlton

Plaintiff,
19

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR
PAGE LIMIT EXTENSION FOR MOTIONS
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

v.
20
21
22

KMART CORPORATION, a Michigan
Corporation, BIG LOTS, INC., an Ohio
Corporation, and BIG LOTS STORES,
INC., an Ohio Corporation,

23

Defendants.

24
AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS.
25
26
27
28
20106121v1

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR PAGE LIMIT EXTENSION FOR
MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

1

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Sofpool, LLC (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants Kmart Corporation

2

(“Kmart”) and Big Lots Stores, Inc. (“Big Lots”) (Kmart and Big Lots will collectively be

3

referred to as “Defendants”) will be filing motions for summary judgment on or before September

4

27, 2012;

5
6

WHEREAS, Pursuant to the Court’s Pre-Trial Order (Dkt. 23), “[u]nless prior permission

7

has been granted, memoranda of law in support and in opposition to motions are limited to thirty

8

(30) pages . . . .” (Dkt. 23 at 3:26 – 4:2.)

9
10

WHEREAS, this is a design patent infringement case that involves comparisons of patent

SUITE 1400

I R V I N E , CA 9 2 6 1 4 - 2 5 4 5

5 PARK PLAZA

T ROUTMAN S ANDERS LLP

11

drawings, the accused product, and the prior art. Plaintiff and Defendants wish to incorporate

12

certain images and drawings into the memorandum in support of their motions for summary

13

judgment to provide context to the written words and to make it easier to read. However,

14

incorporating these images causes the memorandum to exceed 30 pages. This is not due to long-

15

windedness. As the motions are based on two independent grounds (non-infringement and patent

16

invalidity), the memorandum requires two separate analyses. The written part of Plaintiff’s and

17

Defendants’ memorandum (i.e. without the images) will not exceed the usual 30 page limit.

18
19

WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants believe that incorporating the images will assist the

20

Court in considering the issues. As the Court’s Pre-Trial Conference Order requires prior

21

permission to file a memorandum in excess of 30 pages and Plaintiff and Defendants cannot

22

obtain such permission by regular motion on regular time before their motions are due, Plaintiff

23

and Defendants respectfully request this permission via this stipulation.

24
25

WHEREAS, the Plaintiff and Defendants have agreed that each should have a page limit

26

extension to 40 pages or less when images are incorporated, but which does not exceed 30 pages

27

without such images.

28
20106121v1

-1JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR PAGE LIMIT EXTENSION FOR
MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

1

NOW THEREFORE, Plaintiff and Defendants, by and through their respective counsel,

2

hereby stipulate and agree to a 40 page limit or less when images are incorporated, but which

3

does not exceed 30 pages without such images, subject to the Court’s approval.

4
5
6

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.
Dated: September 13, 2012

TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP

7
By: /s/ Paul L. Gale
Paul L. Gale

8
9

Attorneys for Defendants
KMART CORPORATION and BIG LOTS
STORES, INC.

10

SUITE 1400

I R V I N E , CA 9 2 6 1 4 - 2 5 4 5

5 PARK PLAZA

T ROUTMAN S ANDERS LLP

11
12

Dated: September 13, 2012

COSTELLO LAW CORPORATION

13
By: /s/ John P. Costello
John P. Costello

14
15
16

Attorneys for Plaintiff
SOFPOOL, LLC

17

PURSUANT TO PARTIES’ STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

18
19

DATED: September 17, 2012

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
20106121v1

-2JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR PAGE LIMIT EXTENSION FOR
MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT