United States v. Christie

Filing 22

STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR THE US TO INTERVENE AND FILE BRIEF REGARDING CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 8/12/11. (klhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/12/2011)

Case3:11-cv-02264-JCS Document33

1
2
3

Filed08/12/11 Page1 of 2

MELINDA L. HAAG (SBN 132612)
United States Attorney
JOANN M. SWANSON (SBN 88143)
Chief, Civil Division
MICHAEL T. PYLE (SBN 172954)
Assistant United States Attorney

4
5
6

150 Almaden Blvd., Suite 900
San Jose, California 95113
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]

7
Attorneys for Prospective Intervenor United States of America
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
11
AGSAVER LLC,
12
Plaintiff,
13
v.
14
VALENT U.S.A. CORPORATION,
15
Defendant.
16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. C 11-00264 JCS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR THE
UNITED STATES TO INTERVENE
AND FILE BRIEF REGARDING
CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE
Hon. Joseph C. Spero

17
The parties, along with prospective intervenor the United States of America, stipulate to
18
the following request made by counsel for the United States of America to obtain an additional
19
30 days in which to intervene to defend the constitutionality of 35 U.S.C. § 292 in this case.
20
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.1(c) gives the Court the power to grant this additional time as
21
it states, in relevant part, “[u]nless the court sets a later time, the attorney general may intervene
22
within 60 days after the notice is filed or after the court certifies the challenge, whichever is
23
earlier.” The current deadline for moving to intervene is August 16, 2011, and counsel for the
24
United States needs the requested additional time in order to obtain the necessary approval from
25
the Solicitor General’s office to intervene in this action. Giving the United States until
26
September 16, 2011 to intervene would also mean that the United States would file its brief
27
intervening in the case and defending the constitutionality of the statute on the same date that
28
Plaintiff files its opposition to Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Counsel for Plaintiff and
Defendant have agreed that this limited extension of time is acceptable.

Case3:11-cv-02264-JCS Document33

Filed08/12/11 Page2 of 2

1

The parties and the United States have also agreed, subject to the approval of the Court,

2

that Defendant Valent U.S.A. Corporation shall have until October 7, 2011 to file a single brief

3

responding to Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendant’s motion to dismiss and the brief anticipated to

4

be filed by the United States on September 16, 2011.

5

Dated: August 11, 2011

Respectfully submitted,

6

MELINDA HAAG

7

United States Attorney

8
_____/s/ Michael T. Pyle_____
MICHAEL T. PYLE
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorney for United States of America

9
10
11

Dated: August 11, 2011

FARELLA BRAUN + MARTEL LLP

12
_____/s/ James W. Morando_____
Counsel for Plaintiff Agsaver LLC.

13
14

Dated: August 11, 2011

GORDON & REES LLP

15
_____/s/ Fletcher C. Alford_____
Counsel for Defendant Valent U.S.A. Corporation.

16
17
18
19

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED:
The Court, having considered the stipulation of the parties and the United States, orders
that the United States shall have until September 16, 2011 to intervene and file a substantive

21

brief in support of its defense of the constitutionality of 35 U.S.C. § 292 in this case. Defendant

22

Valent U.S.A. Corporation shall have until October 7, 2011 to file a a single brief responding to

23

Plaintiff’s opposition to the motion to dismiss and the brief to be filed by the United States.

ER

R NIA

Spero

FO

seph C.

LI

Judge Jo

A

H

28

RT

27

___________________________________
HONORABLE JOSEPH C. SPERO
U.S. MAGISTERATE JUDGE
NO

26

8/12/11
DATED:____________________

UNIT
ED

25

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

24

S

20

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR U.S. TO INTERVENE
2
C 11-02264 JCS