E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company v. USA Performance Technology, Inc. et al
Filing
56
ORDER GRANTING 55 JOINT STATUS REPORT AND EXTENDING STAY OF ACTION. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 7/24/12. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/24/2012)
Case3:11-cv-01665-JSW Document55 Filed07/23/12 Page1 of 4
1
2
3
4
5
GLYNN & FINLEY, LLP
CLEMENT L. GLYNN, Bar No. 57117
MORGAN K. LOPEZ, Bar No. 215513
JONATHAN A. ELDREDGE, Bar No. 238559
One Walnut Creek Center
100 Pringle Avenue, Suite 500
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 210-2800
Facsimile: (925) 945-1975
10
MORRIS JAMES LLP
P. Clarkson Collins, Jr., Pro Hac Vice Pending
Jason C. Jowers, Pro Hac Vice Pending
500 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1500
Wilmington, Delaware 19801
Telephone: (302) 888-6800
Facsimile: (302) 571-1750
E-mail: pcollins@morrisjames.com
jjowers@morrisjames.com
11
Attorneys for E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
6
7
8
9
12
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
16
E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY,
17
Plaintiff,
18
v.
19
20
USA PERFORMANCE TECHNOLOGY,
INC., PERFORMANCE GROUP (USA),
INC., WALTER LIEW, and JOHN LIU,
21
Defendants.
22
23
24
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 3:11-cv-01665-JSW
JOINT STATUS REPORT AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING
STAY OF ACTION
Judge: Hon. Jeffrey S. White
Hearing Date: None
Pursuant to the Court’s March 27, 2012 Order, Plaintiff E. I. du Pont de Nemours and
25
Company (“DuPont”) and defendants Walter Liew and USA Performance Technology, Inc.
26
(collectively “USAPT”) submit this Joint Status Report. The parties request that the stay in this
27
matter set to expire on July 30, 2012, remain in place for an additional 60 days, through
28
September 28, 2012.
-1JOINT STATUS REPORT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING STAY
Case3:11-cv-01665-JSW Document55 Filed07/23/12 Page2 of 4
On August 23, 2011, the United States filed United States v. Walter Liew and Christina
1
2
Liew, No. CR-11-0573-RS. On February 7, 2012, the United States filed a superseding
3
indictment in said action. Id. at Docket # 64.
DuPont’s Position: The superseding indictment alleges that defendant Walter Liew, his
4
5
wife, Christina Liew, and several other defendants violated multiple federal trade secret and
6
economic espionage laws when they stole – and utilized – the trade secrets at issue in this action.
7
Inter alia, Mr. Liew is charged with Conspiracy to Commit Economic Espionage, Conspiracy to
8
Commit Theft of Trade Secrets, Possession of Trade Secrets, Conveying Trade Secrets, Witness
9
Tampering, and False Statements. See id. ¶¶ 16-97. In addition, the superseding indictment
10
identifies five DuPont trade secrets relating to its TiO2 technology at issue in the criminal action.
11
Id. ¶ 14.
USAPT’s Position: Defendants believe that the superseding indictment speaks for itself,
12
13
and no further explanation or commentary is appropriate or needed.
14
On September 7, 2011, this Court issued an Order relating the criminal proceeding with
15
this action, pursuant to its determination that this action and the criminal proceeding are related
16
within the meaning of Crim. L.R. 8-1(b). (Docket # 42.)1
On September 23, 2011, the parties filed a joint status report requesting that the stay
17
18
initially entered on July 22, 2011 (Docket # 39), be extended for an additional 60 days. (Docket
19
# 44.) On September 29, 2011, the Court granted the parties’ request. (Docket # 45.)
On November 23, 2011, the parties filed an additional joint status report requesting that
20
21
the stay be extended for an additional 60 days. (Docket # 46.) The Court granted the parties’
22
request on November 29, 2011. (Docket # 48.)
On January 24, 2012, the parties filed an additional joint status report requesting that the
23
24
stay be extended for an additional 60 days. (Docket # 49.) The Court granted the parties’
25
request on January 31, 2012. (Docket # 50.)
26
27
28
1
On September 16, 2011, DuPont dismissed without prejudice defendant John Liu pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). (Docket # 43.) Thus, the only remaining defendants
in this action are Walter Liew and his company, USA Performance Technology Inc.
-2JOINT STATUS REPORT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING STAY
Case3:11-cv-01665-JSW Document55 Filed07/23/12 Page3 of 4
1
On March 26, 2012, the parties filed an additional joint status report requesting that the
2
stay be extended for an additional 60 days. (Docket # 51.) The Court granted the parties’
3
request on March 27, 2012. (Docket # 52.)
4
On May 23, 2012, the parties filed an additional joint status report requesting that the
5
stay be extended for an additional 60 days. (Docket # 53). The Court granted the parties’
6
request on May 23, 2012. (Docket # 54).
7
8
9
The undersigned counsel request that the stay remain in place for an additional 60 days,
at which time the parties will update the Court.
Dated: July 23, 2012
10
11
12
13
MORRIS JAMES LLP
P. CLARKSON COLLINS, JR.
JASON C. JOWERS
500 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1500
Wilmington, DE 19801
14
15
16
By /s/ Morgan K. Lopez
Attorneys for Plaintiff
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
GLYNN & FINLEY, LLP
CLEMENT L. GLYNN
MORGAN K. LOPEZ
JONATHAN A. ELDREDGE
One Walnut Creek Center
100 Pringle Avenue, Suite 500
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Dated: July 23, 2012
MOUNT & STOELKER, P.C.
DANIEL S. MOUNT
ON LU
KEVIN M. PASQUINELLI
RiverPark Tower, Suite 1650
333 West San Carlos Street
San Jose, CA 95110-2740
By /s/ Daniel S. Mount
Attorneys for Defendants USA Performance
Technology, Inc., and Walter Liew
24
25
26
27
28
-3JOINT STATUS REPORT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING STAY
Case3:11-cv-01665-JSW Document55 Filed07/23/12 Page4 of 4
[PROPOSED] ORDER
1
2
Having read and considered the Joint Status Report,
3
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
4
The parties’ request that the stay be extended until September 28, 2012 is hereby
5
GRANTED. Counsel shall submit a joint status report on or before September 21, 2012.
6
7
8 July ____, 2012
24
9
10
Honorable Jeffrey S. White
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
JUDGE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4JOINT STATUS REPORT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING STAY
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?