Reiber, et al v. TDK Corporation, et al

Filing 53

ORDER AND CONSENT JUDGMENT signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 2/21/14. All claims and counterclaims between Plaintiffs and Defendants in this Civil Action are hereby dismissed with prejudice. Each party shall bear its own costs and attorne ys' fees. The parties agree that this Order represents a final adjudication of their claims and counterclaims which were or could have been asserted in the action. This Judgment is final, enforceable and non-appealable. CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Robert J. Yorio (SBN 93178)
Marcus H. Yang (SBN 273509)
CARR & FERRELL LLP
120 Constitution Drive
Menlo Park, California 94025
Telephone No.: [phone]
Facsimile No.: [phone]
Email Address: [e-mail]
Email Address: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Steven F. Reiber and Mary L. Reiber

7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Terry Garnett (SBN 151212)
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
601 S. Figueroa Street, 41st Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone No.: [phone]
Facsimile No.: [phone]
Email Address: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
TDK CORPORATION, SAE MAGNETICS (H.K.)
LTD., HUSKO, INC., and HEADWAY
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

14
15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17
18

STEVEN F. REIBER and MARY L. REIBER

19

Plaintiffs,

20
21
22

ORDER
AND CONSENT JUDGMENT

v.
TDK CORPORATION, SAE MAGNETICS
(H.K.) LTD., HUSKO, INC., and HEADWAY
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

23
24

Case No. 2:11-cv-01057-WBS-KJN

Defendants.
AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIM.

25
26

It has been represented to the Court that Plaintiffs, Steven F. Reiber and Mary L. Reiber

27

(collectively “Plaintiffs”), and Defendants TDK Corporation, SAE Magnetics (H.K.) Ltd., Husko,

28

Inc. and Headway Technologies, Inc. (collectively “Defendants”), have agreed to settle this Civil
-1
[PROPOSED] ORDER AND CONSENT JUDGMENT
{00749607v1}

CASE NO. 2:11-CV-01057-WBS-KJN

1

Action, including all claims and counterclaims brought in this Civil Action.

2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that:

3

1.
2.

4
5
6
7

Ceramic Bonding Tip and Dissipative Ceramic Bonding Tool Tip, and issued March 12, 2002 and
November 25, 2003, respectively (the “Patents-in-Suit”).
3.

All claims and counterclaims between Plaintiffs and Defendants in this Civil

Action are hereby dismissed with prejudice.

10

4.

Each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees.

5.

11
12

Defendants stipulate that they have not sustained their burden of proving the

invalidity of any claim in United States Patent Nos. 6,354,479 and 6,651,864, entitled Dissipative

8
9

The Court has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of this action.

The parties agree that this Order represents a final adjudication of their claims and

counterclaims which were or could have been asserted in the action.

13

6.

This Judgment is final, enforceable and non-appealable.

14
IT IS SO ORDERED.
15
16

Dated: February 21, 2014

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2
[PROPOSED] ORDER AND CONSENT JUDGMENT
{00749607v1}

CASE NO. 2:11-CV-01057-WBS-KJN