Richtek Technology Corporation et al v. uPI Semiconductor Corporation et al
Filing
496
ORDER RE PLAINTIFF RICHTEK TECHNOLOGY CORP.S AND NON-PARTIES ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC.S AND BEST DATA PRODUCTS D/B/A DIAMOND MULTIMEDIA, INC.S STIPULATED REQUEST TO ALLOW USE OF ITC DISCOVERY by Hon. William Alsup granting 495 Stipulation.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/10/2016)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Yitai Hu (SBN 248085) (yitai.hu@alston.com)
Ryan W. Koppelman (SBN 290704) (ryan.koppelman@alston.com)
Hsin-Yi (Cindy) Huang (SBN 215152) (cindy.huang@alston.com)
Samuel T. Lam (SBN 285135) (sam.lam@alston.com)
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
1950 University Avenue, 5th Floor
East Palo Alto, CA 94303
Telephone:
650-838-2000
Facsimile:
650-838-2001
Elizabeth H. Rader (SBN 184963) (elizabeth.rader@alston.com)
Jennifer (Celine) Liu (SBN 268990) (celine.liu@alston.com)
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
950 F Street NW
Washington, DC 20004
Telephone:
202-239-3008
Facsimile:
202-239-3333
Attorneys for Plaintiff
RICHTEK TECHNOLOGY CORP.
11
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
15
16
RICHTEK TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION,
Order re:
17
18
19
20
21
22
No. C 09-05659 WHA
Plaintiff,
v.
uPI SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION,
POWERCHIP TECHNOLOGY CORP.,
MAXCHIP ELECTRONICS CORP., SILICON
XTAL CORPORATION, AMANDA DAI, and
JACKY LEE,
PLAINTIFF RICHTEK TECHNOLOGY
CORP.’S AND NON-PARTIES
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC.’S
AND BEST DATA PRODUCTS D/B/A
DIAMOND MULTIMEDIA, INC.’S
STIPULATED REQUEST TO ALLOW
USE OF ITC DISCOVERY
Defendants.
23
24
25
26
27
28
Order re:
-1PL.’S & NON-PARTIES AMD & DIAMOND’S STIP. TO USE ITC DISCOVERY
LEGAL02/36367481v1
Case No. 3:09-cv-05659-WHA
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-12, Plaintiff Richtek Technology Corporation and non-parties
1
2
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (“AMD”) and Best Data Products d/b/a Diamond Multimedia, Inc.
3
(“Diamond”), by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby jointly submit the following
4
Stipulation in the above-entitled action:
5
WHEREAS, AMD and Diamond produced to Richtek certain documents in the related ITC
6
Investigation No. 337-TA-698, Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing the Same (the
7
“ITC Proceedings”);
8
WHEREAS, on March 31, 2016, Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler ordered that “[a]ll discovery
9
that Richtek and uPI produced in the related ITC investigation will be treated as if it were produced in
10
this lawsuit, protected by a similar protective order” (Dkt. No. 473 at 4);
11
WHEREAS, Richtek has requested AMD’s and Diamond’s consent to treat discovery produced
12
by AMD and Diamond in the ITC Proceedings as if it were produced in the instant lawsuit, protected by
13
the Protective Order in this case; and
WHEREAS, AMD and Diamond do not object to the use in this case of documents that AMD
14
15
and Diamond produced in the ITC proceedings, provided that documents designated as containing
16
Confidential Business Information in the ITC Proceedings are designated as “Highly Confidential –
17
Attorneys’ Eyes Only” under the Protective Order in this case, and documents designated as containing
18
Highly Sensitive Information in the ITC Proceedings are designed as “Highly Confidential – Source
19
Code” under the Protective Order in this case;
NOW, THEREFORE, AMD, Diamond, and Richtek jointly request that all discovery that
20
21
AMD and Diamond produced in the ITC Proceedings be treated as if it were produced in this lawsuit,
22
provided that documents designated as containing Confidential Business Information in the ITC
23
Proceedings are designated as “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only” under the Protective Order
24
in this case, and documents designated as containing Highly Sensitive Information in the ITC
25
Proceedings are designed as “Highly Confidential – Source Code” under the Protective Order in this
26
case.
27
28
-2PL.’S & NON-PARTIES AMD & DIAMOND’S STIP. TO USE ITC DISCOVERY
LEGAL02/36367481v1
Case No. 3:09-cv-05659-WHA
Order re:
1
Dated: May 9, 2016
2
Respectfully submitted,
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
3
By: /s/Samuel T. Lam
Yitai Hu (SBN 248085)
yitai.hu@alston.com
Ryan W. Koppelman (SBN 290704)
ryan.koppelman@alston.com
Samuel T. Lam (SBN 285135)
sam.lam@alston.com
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
1950 University Ave., 5th Floor
East Palo Alto, CA 94303-2282
Tel: (650) 838-2000
Fax: (650) 838-2001
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Elizabeth H. Rader (SBN 183963)
elizabeth.rader@alston.com
Jennifer (Celine) Liu (SBN 268990)
(celine.liu@alston.com)
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
950 F Street
Washington, D.C. 20004
Tel: (202) 239-3008
Fax: (202) 239-3333
11
12
13
14
15
16
Attorneys for Plaintiff
RICHTEK TECHNOLOGY CORP.
17
18
O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP
19
By: /s/Vision L. Winter
Vision L. Winter (SBN 234172)
vwinter@omm.com
O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP
400 South Hope Street, 18th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Tel: (213) 430-6000
Fax: (213) 430-6407
20
21
22
23
24
Darin W. Snyder (SBN 136003)
dsnyder@omm.com
O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP
Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: (415) 984-8700
Fax: (415) 984-8701
25
26
27
28
Order re:
-3PL.’S & NON-PARTIES AMD & DIAMOND’S STIP. TO USE ITC DISCOVERY
LEGAL02/36367481v1
Case No. 3:09-cv-05659-WHA
1
2
Attorneys for Non-Party
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. and BEST DATA
PRODUCTS D/B/A DIAMOND MULTIMEDIA, INC.
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
-4Order re:
PL.’S & NON-PARTIES AMD & DIAMOND’S STIP. TO USE ITC DISCOVERY
LEGAL02/36367481v1
Case No. 3:09-cv-05659-WHA
1
FILER’S ATTESTATION
2
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3) regarding signatures, I, Samuel T. Lam, attest that
3
concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained.
4
/s/Samuel T. Lam
Samuel T. Lam
5
6
7
8
9
10
[PROPOSED] ORDER
11
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
12
13
May 10
Dated: ____________________, 2016
14
___________________________________
United States District Judge
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-5PL.’S & NON-PARTIES AMD & DIAMOND’S STIP. TO USE ITC DISCOVERY
LEGAL02/36367481v1
Case No. 3:09-cv-05659-WHA
Order re:
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?