Autodesk Inc. v. Dassault Systemes Solid Works Corporation

Filing 178

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF CALIFORNIA LAW CLAIMS. Signed by Judge Alsup on November 30, 2009. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/30/2009)

Download PDF
Case3:08-cv-04397-WHA Document172 Filed11/24/09 Page1 of 3 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 02966.51459/3178690.1 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: (650) 801-5000 Facsimile: (650) 801-5100 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 VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS UNDER CALIFORNIA BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE §§ 17200 AND 17500 Case No. 3:08-cv-04397-WHA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN STATE LAW CLAIMS Case3:08-cv-04397-WHA Document172 Filed11/24/09 Page2 of 3 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 02966.51459/3178690.1 WHEREAS Plaintiff and Counterdefendant Autodesk, Inc. ("Autodesk") asserts in its First Amended Complaint claims for relief for Unfair Business Practices, Deceptive Business Practices, Unlawful Business Practices, and Deceptive, False, and Misleading Advertising under California State Law; WHEREAS, Defendant and Counterclaimant Dassault Systèmes SolidWorks Corporation ("SolidWorks") asserts in its Answer and Counterclaims to Autodesk's First Amended Complaint counterclaims for relief for Unfair Business Practices, Deceptive Business Practices, Unlawful Business Practices, and Deceptive, False, and Misleading Advertising under California State Law, WHEREAS Autodesk and SolidWorks have agreed to dismiss the above-described California state law claims; NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties to this action, through their respective counsel, and ordered by the Court, as follows: 1. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), Counts VI (Unfair Business Practices ­ California Law), VII (Deceptive Business Practices ­ California Law), VIII (Unlawful Business Practices ­ California Law), and IX (Deceptive, False, and Misleading Advertising ­ California Law) in Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 2. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), Counts III (Unfair Competition ­ California Law) and IV (False Advertising ­ California Law) in Defendant's Answer and Counterclaims to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 3. The parties covenant and agree not to refile the dismissed claims described in paragraphs 1 and 2 (above) concerning the acts alleged in Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint or Defendant's Answer and Counterclaims to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, respectively, in this or any other court, whether state or federal. 4. Each party is to bear its own fees and costs with respect to the claims recited in paragraphs 1 and 2, above. Nothing in this stipulation shall affect in any way the remainder of the claims for relief, counterclaims, or affirmative defenses asserted by either party in this case or any other lawsuit and all rights are expressly reserved with respect to those remaining claims. -2Case No. 3:08-cv-04397-WHA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING STATE LAW CLAIMS Case3:08-cv-04397-WHA Document172 Filed11/24/09 Page3 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated: November 24, 2009 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP By: /s/ David E. Melaugh DAVID E. MELAUGH Attorney for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant, AUTODESK, INC. Dated: November 24, 2009 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART OLIVER & HEDGES, LLP By: /s/ Evette D. Pennypacker EVETTE D. PENNYPACKER Attorney for Defendant and Counterclaimant, DASSAULT SYSTÈMES SOLIDWORKS CORPORATION S DISTRICT E UNIT ED PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED 30 Dated: November _____, 2009 S T TA C 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 02966.51459/3178690.1 RN F D IS T IC T O R -3Case No. 3:08-cv-04397-WHA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING STATE LAW CLAIMS A 19 HONORABLE WILLIAM H. ALSUP United States District Court Judge E C LI FO 18 illi Judge W am Alsu p R NIA OO IT IS S RDERE D RT U O NO RT H

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?