Olympic Developments AG, LLC v. Microsoft Corporation et al

Filing 82

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER TOPERMIT PLAINTIFF TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT REMOVING ALLEGATIONS OF INDIRECT INFRINGEMENT AND TO VACATE DEADLINE FOR FILING RENEWED MOTIONS. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 4/22/11. (klh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Eric A. Buresh (Pro Hac Vice Pending)
[e-mail]
Abran J. Kean (Pro Hac Vice Pending)
[e-mail]
SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P.
2555 Grand Blvd.
Kansas City, MO 64108-2613
Phone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Andrew L. Chang (CA Bar No. 222309)
[e-mail]
SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P.
One Montgomery, Suite 2700
San Francisco, CA 94104-4505
Phone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA LLC

14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

17
18
19
20
21
22
23

OLYMPIC DEVELOPMENTS AG, LLC,
Case No. C-11-01080 JCS
Plaintiff,
v.
SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT
AMERICA LLC,
Defendants.

JOINT STIPULATION AND MOTION
TO PERMIT PLAINTIFF TO FILE A
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
REMOVING ALLEGATIONS OF
INDIRECT INFRINGEMENT AND TO
VACATE DEADLINE FOR FILING
RENEWED MOTIONS

24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION AND MOTION TO REQUIRE PLAINTIFF TO FILE
A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT REMOVING ALLEGATIONS OF INDIRECT
INFRINGEMENT AND TO VACATE DEADLINE FOR FILING RENEWED MOTIONS

Case No. C-11-01080 JCS

1

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-12 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), Plaintiff

2

Olympic Developments AG, LLC (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Sony Computer Entertainment

3

America LLC (“SCEA”) (jointly, the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby

4

agree and stipulate that Plaintiff be permitted to file a Second Amended Complaint on or before

5

Monday, April 25, 2011 that omits any and all claims of indirect infringement (including

6

induced infringement and contributory infringement). Further, Plaintiff and Defendant hereby

7

stipulate and agree that the April 25, 2011 deadline for Defendant to file renewed motions or

8

otherwise respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint be vacated. Finally, Plaintiff and

9

Defendant hereby stipulate and agree that Defendant will not be required to file an Answer or

10

other responsive pleadings to Plaintiff's forthcoming Second Amended Complaint until 14 days

11

after service of the Second Amended Complaint, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

12

15(a)(3). In support of the Parties’ stipulation, the Parties state as follows:

13

1.

Plaintiff filed the present action in the Central District of California on

14

September 28, 2010 (Case No. CV10-07237, Dkt. No. 1) and served SCEA with the Summons

15

and Complaint on September 30, 2010 (Case No. CV10-07237, Dkt No. 10). On November 18,

16

2010, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (Case No. CV10-07237, Dkt. No. 34), and a

17

corresponding new Complaint related to SCEA and other Defendants (Case No. 2:10-CV-

18

08874, Dkt. No. 1). On January 6, 2011, SCEA and other Defendants filed a motion to dismiss

19

Plaintiff’s claim of indirect infringement (Case No. 2:10-CV-08874, Dkt. No. 39)

20

2.

Before deciding Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff's indirect infringement

21

claim, the Central District ordered the case against SCEA transferred to the Northern District of

22

California, San Francisco Division, pursuant to the Parties’ stipulation on February 28, 2011

23

(Case No. 2:10-CV-08874, Dkt. No. 66). In that Order, the Central District stated that “SCEA

24

shall have 14 days from the docketing of those claims in the Northern District of California to

25

file a renewed version of the Motion to Dismiss (which may include new arguments and

26

authorities) or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint.” Id. The present case was

27

docketed in the Northern District of California on March 11, 2011 (Dkt. Nos. 68, 70). The

28
JOINT STIPULATION AND MOTION TO REQUIRE PLAINTIFF TO FILE
A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT REMOVING ALLEGATIONS OF INDIRECT
INFRINGEMENT AND TO VACATE DEADLINE FOR FILING RENEWED MOTION TO
DISMISS INDIRECT INFRINGEMENT CLAIMS.

Case No. C 11-01080 JCS

2

1

Parties stipulated on March 25, 2011 that SCEA shall have until April 25, 2011 to file a renewed

2

version of its motion to dismiss or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint.

3

(Dkt Nos. 72, 73).

4

3.

Since the present case was transferred to this Court, the Parties have met and

5

conferred and agreed that Plaintiff will file a Second Amended Complaint on or before April 25,

6

2011, and will therein omit any and all claims of indirect infringement (including induced

7

infringement and contributory infringement). Plaintiff's previous claims of indirect

8

infringement are to be stricken. The Parties also agreed after conferring that the April 25, 2011

9

deadline to file renewed motions regarding Plaintiff's indirect infringement allegations should be

10

vacated. The Parties also agreed that pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3),

11

Defendants shall have until 14 days after Plaintiff files its Second Amended Complaint to

12

Answer or otherwise file responsive pleadings or motions, including renewed motions.

13

WHEREFORE, the Parties, through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate to and

14

request this Court to enter an Order vacating the April 25, 2011 deadline for SCEA to file

15

renewed motions regarding Plaintiff's indirect infringement allegations, ordering Plaintiff to file

16

a Second Amended Complaint removing any and all allegations of indirect infringement

17

(including induced infringement and contributory infringement) no later than April 25, 2011,

18

and establishing the date for SCEA to file an Answer or other responsive pleadings or motions

19

to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint at 14 days after the Second Amended Complaint is

20

filed.

21
22

[REMAINDER OF PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK]

23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION AND MOTION TO REQUIRE PLAINTIFF TO FILE
A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT REMOVING ALLEGATIONS OF INDIRECT
INFRINGEMENT AND TO VACATE DEADLINE FOR FILING RENEWED MOTION TO
DISMISS INDIRECT INFRINGEMENT CLAIMS.

Case No. C 11-01080 JCS

3

1

Dated: April 21, 2011

Respectfully submitted,

2

WHITE FIELD, INC.

3

By: /s/ Steven W. Ritcheson
Steven W. Ritcheson
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF OLYMPIC
DEVELOPMENTS AG, LLC

4
5
6
7

Dated: April 21, 2011

8

Respectfully submitted,
SHOOK, HARDY & BACON

9

By: /s/ Eric A. Buresh
Eric A. Buresh
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT
AMERICA LLC

10
11
12
13
14

Pursuant to General Order No. 45.X.B., the below filer attests that concurrence in the
filing of this document has been obtained from the above Signatories.

15
16

Dated: April 21, 2011

_______/s/ Andrew L. Chang___________
Andrew L. Chang

17
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

RT

23

seph C.
Judge Jo

24

Sper

A

H

ER

R NIA

HONORABLE JOSEPH C. SPERO
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
o
NO

22

________________________________________

FO

21

Dated: 4/22/11

UNIT
ED

20

ISTRIC
ES D
TC
AT
T

RT
U
O

S

19

LI

18

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION AND MOTION TO REQUIRE PLAINTIFF TO FILE
A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT REMOVING ALLEGATIONS OF INDIRECT
INFRINGEMENT AND TO VACATE DEADLINE FOR FILING RENEWED MOTION TO
DISMISS INDIRECT INFRINGEMENT CLAIMS.

Case No. C 11-01080 JCS

4