Autodesk Inc. v. Dassault Systemes Solid Works Corporation

Filing 111

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING HEARING ON AUTODESK'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON SOLIDWORKS' COUNTERCLAIMS. Signed by Judge Alsup on November 5, 2009. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/5/2009)

Case3:08-cv-04397-WHA Document110

Filed11/03/09 Page1 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
02966.51459/3184820.1

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART OLIVER & HEDGES, LLP Claude M. Stern (Bar No. 96737) Evette D. Pennypacker (Bar No. 203515) Andrea Pallios Roberts (Bar No. 228128) Zachary M. Fabish (Bar No. 247535) 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 560 Redwood Shores, California 94065 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Defendant Dassault Systèmes SolidWorks Corporation UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

AUTODESK, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff and Counterdefendant, v. DASSAULT SYSTÈMES SOLIDWORKS CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Defendant and Counterclaimant.

Case No.

3:08-cv-04397-WHA

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING HEARING ON AUTODESK'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON SOLIDWORKS' COUNTERCLAIMS

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1(a), 6-2 and 7-12, Defendant Dassault Systèmes SolidWorks Corporation ("SolidWorks"), hereby respectfully requests that the Court continue the hearing date on Autodesk's Motion for Summary Judgment on SolidWorks' Counterclaims (Dkt. No. 77) from November 19, 2009 to December 3, 2009. Plaintiff Autodesk, Inc. ("Autodesk") stipulates that it has no opposition to such a request. In support of this request, SolidWorks represents as follows (as to which Autodesk makes no comment): WHEREAS, Autodesk filed a motion for summary judgment on October 13, 2009 (Dkt. No. 77) with a noticed hearing date of November 19, 2009;
Case No. 3:08-cv-04397-WHA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case3:08-cv-04397-WHA Document110

Filed11/03/09 Page2 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
02966.51459/3184820.1

WHEREAS, SolidWorks filed a motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative summary adjudication, on October 29, 2009 (Dkt. No. 91) with a noticed hearing date of December 3, 2009; WHEREAS, at the October 13, 2009 discovery hearing, the Court expressed a preference to hear the parties' summary judgment motions separately, unless the motions are "interlocked in some way," such as having the same legal standard (See Ex. A); WHEREAS, both parties' motions for summary judgment address puffery in the context of their respective false advertising claims and counterclaims, and will require the application of the same legal standards. For example, Autodesk argues in its motion for summary judgment that its "advertisements constitute non-actionable puffery because they make no specific claims of any kind." (Dkt. No. 77 at 4:3-4) SolidWorks' motion offers a similar puffery argument for its accused web-content advertisement (Dkt. 91 at 28:26-30:21); WHEREAS, SolidWorks' lead trial counsel, Claude Stern, is also not able to attend the currently scheduled November 19, 2009 hearing on Autodesk's Motion for Summary Judgment due to a previously scheduled mediation to be held on the same day in St. Louis, Missouri. This mediation for another matter has been scheduled for over a month by all counsel and their respective clients. It is important that SolidWorks' lead trial counsel be present at the hearing on Autodesk's Motion for Summary Judgment for many reasons, including the fact that the Court and the parties may discuss issues related to trial scheduled for January 11, 2010; WHEREAS, because of the Thanksgiving holiday, the next available Thursday after November 19, 2009 on which the Court could hear summary judgment motions is December 3, 2009; WHEREAS, continuing the November 19, 2009 hearing date to December 3, 2009 will not impact the case schedule in any way because there is already a summary judgment hearing scheduled for December 3, 2009 in this case; WHEREAS, the parties have met and conferred and Autodesk does not oppose the continuance of the currently scheduled November 19, 2009 hearing date on Autodesk's Motion for Summary Judgment to December 3, 2009; -2Case No. 3:08-cv-04397-WHA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case3:08-cv-04397-WHA Document110

Filed11/03/09 Page3 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
02966.51459/3184820.1

WHEREAS, in accordance with Civil Local Rule 6-2, there have been four other time modifications, including time to respond to the initial complaint (Dkt. No. 7); time for the Parties to supplement initial disclosures pursuant to Rule 26(a)(1) (Dkt. No. 40); time for third parties to produce documents called for by Rule 45 subpoenas, and for the Parties to supplement interrogatory responses (Dkt. 59); and time to file a motion to compel production (Dkt. 70); NOW THEREFORE, SolidWorks respectfully requests that the hearing date on Autodesk's Motion for Summary Judgment on SolidWorks' Counterclaims (Dkt. No. 77) be continued from November 19, 2009 to December 3, 2009. Autodesk stipulates that it has no objection to this request. Dated: November 3, 2009 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART OLIVER & HEDGES, LLP

By:

/s/Evette D. Pennypacker EVETTE D. PENNYPACKER Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant, DASSAULT SYSTÈMES SOLIDWORKS CORPORATION

Dated: November 3, 2009

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

By: /s/David E. Melaugh DAVID E. MELAUGH Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant, AUTODESK, INC. PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNIT ED

5 Dated: November ___, 2009

S

S DISTRICT TE C TA

-3-

D ICase No. 3:08-cv-04397-WHA T S T R [PROPOSED] ORDER STIPULATION ANDI C

ER

N

OF

A

C

LI

FO

HONORABLE WILLIAM H. ALSUP United States District CourtAlsup Judge illiam Judge W

R NIA

O OR IT IS S

DERED

RT U O

NO

RT

H

Case3:08-cv-04397-WHA Document110

Filed11/03/09 Page4 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
02966.51459/3184820.1

ATTESTATION Pursuant to General Order No. 45, I hereby attest that I have on file an email from David E. Melaugh of Morrison & Foerster LLP, attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant AUTODESK, INC., agreeing to the filing of this electronically filed document. Dated: November 3, 2009 By: /s/Evette D. Pennypacker Evette D. Pennypacker

-4-

Case No. 3:08-cv-04397-WHA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER