Infineon Technologies AG v. Volterra Semiconductor Corporation
Filing
338
Order by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu granting 336 Stipulation.(dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/9/2014)
Case3:11-cv-06239-MMC Document336 Filed09/08/14 Page1 of 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
EDWARD R. REINES (Bar No. 135960)
edward.reines@weil.com
SONAL N. MEHTA (Bar No. 222086)
sonal.mehta@weil.com
ANNE CAPPELLA (Bar No. 181402)
anne.cappella@weil.com
JUSTIN M. LEE (Bar No. 268310)
justin.m.lee@weil.com
BLAKE R. DAVIS (Bar No. 294360)
blake.davis@weil.com
WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
Silicon Valley Office
201 Redwood Shores Parkway
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: (650) 802-3000
Facsimile: (650) 802-3100
9
10
Attorneys for Defendant
Volterra Semiconductor Corporation
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
14
INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG,
Plaintiff,
15
16
17
18
Case No. CV-11-6239 (MMC) (DMR)
STIPULATED REQUEST AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER CHANGING
VOLTERRA’S TIME TO RESPOND
TO INFINEON’S MOTION TO
DISCLOSE CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION TO ITS APPOINTED
EXPERT, PETER ELENIUS
vs.
VOLTERRA SEMICONDUCTOR
CORPORATION,
Defendant.
19
20
AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATED REQUEST TO CHANGE TIME
1
CASE NO. CV-11-6239 (MMC) (DMR)
Case3:11-cv-06239-MMC Document336 Filed09/08/14 Page2 of 4
1
Defendant and Counterclaimant Volterra Semiconductor Corporation (“Volterra”)
2
Plaintiff and Counterdefendant Infineon Technologies AG (“Infineon”) and (collectively “the
3
Parties”) have conferred by and through their counsel and pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2 and
4
7-12, and subject to the Court’s approval, HEREBY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS:
5
6
WHEREAS, on July 17, 2012, the Court entered the Parties’ Stipulated Protective Order
(ECF 104);
7
WHEREAS, the Protective Order requires each party to notify the other in advance of
8
disclosing documents designated “Highly Confidential - Outside Counsels’ Eyes Only” to an
9
expert witness and provide the party who designated the material confidential opportunity to
10
11
12
object;
WHEREAS, on August 22, 2014, Infineon disclosed to Volterra its intent to disclose
confidential information to Mr. Peter Elenius;
13
WHEREAS, on August 29, 2014, Volterra objected to the disclosure;
14
WHEREAS, the Protective Order requires, upon unresolved objections, the party seeking
15
to disclose confidential information to file a Motion with the Court within 5 days of the objection,
16
seeking permission to disclose the confidential information;
17
18
19
20
21
WHEREAS, on September 4, 2014 the Court extended the time for Infineon to file its
opening motion until September 5, 2014, pursuant to the parties’ stipulation and proposed order;
WHEREAS, the Parties have been negotiating additional protections that may resolve
Volterra’s objections to Infineon’s disclosure of confidential information to Mr. Elenius;
WHEREAS, the Parties mutually agree that those discussions may be useful in an effort to
22
resolve the dispute without Court intervention and mutually agree to extend Volterra’s time
23
period to respond to Infineon’s Motion To Disclose Confidential Information To Its Appointed
24
Expert, Peter Elenius; and
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, set forth below are the previous time modifications in this case:
(a)
Stipulation and Order regarding date by which Volterra may answer, move
or otherwise plead in response to complaint extended to March 16, 2010 (ECF No. 8);
(b)
Stipulation and Order Extending Response and Hearing Dates re Plaintiff’s
STIPULATED REQUEST TO CHANGE TIME
1
CASE NO. CV-11-6239 (MMC) (DMR)
Case3:11-cv-06239-MMC Document336 Filed09/08/14 Page3 of 4
1
Motion for Leave to Amend Its Infringement Contentions to Add Additional Model Numbers
2
(ECF No. 202).
3
4
(c)
Stipulation Request and Order Changing Time Pursuant to Civil Local
Rule 6-2(A) (ECF No. 211).
5
(d)
Stipulation and Order Extending Response and Hearing Dates re Plaintiff’s
6
Motion for Leave to Amend Its Infringement Contentions to Add Additional Model Numbers
7
(ECF No. 218).
8
(e)
Clerk’s Notice Continuing Case Management Conference (ECF No. 221)
9
(f)
Stipulation and Order Continuing Case Management Conference (ECF No.
(g)
Stipulation and Order Continuing Case Management Conference (ECF No.
(h)
Stipulation and Order Continuing Case Management Conference (ECF No.
(i)
Stipulated Request And Order Changing Time Pursuant To Civil Local
10
238).
11
12
283).
13
14
288).
15
16
Rule 6-2(A) (ECF No. 334).
17
18
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby propose, stipulate and agree as follows, by and through
19
their respective counsel of record, and subject to the Court’s approval, that:
20
1.
Volterra shall have until Tuesday, September 9, 2014 to file its opposition to
21
Infineon’s Motion to Disclose Confidential Information to its Appointed Expert, Peter
22
Elenius (ECF No 335).
23
24
25
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
26
27
28
STIPULATED REQUEST TO CHANGE TIME
2
CASE NO. CV-11-6239 (MMC) (DMR)
Case3:11-cv-06239-MMC Document336 Filed09/08/14 Page4 of 4
Respectfully submitted,
1
2
Dated: September 8, 2014
WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES
3
4
By:
/s/ Justin M. Lee
Justin M. Lee
Attorneys for Defendant Volterra Semiconductor
Corporation
5
6
7
8
Dated: September 8, 2014
BAKER BOTTS, L.L.P.
9
By:
/s/ Aaron D. Davidson
Aaron D. Davidson
Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant
Infineon Technologies AG
10
11
12
13
14
ORDER
15
Volterra shall have until Tuesday, September 9, 2014 to file its opposition to
Infineon’s Motion to Disclose Confidential Information to its Appointed Expert,
Peter Elenius [Docket No. 335].
ORDER
ED
R NIA
DATED: September 9, 2014
O
IT IS S
___________________________________
M. Ryu
R NIA
S
UNIT
ED
RT
H
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
LI
N
A
H
ER
ORDERED
Judge Donna
FO
NO
RT
22
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
IT IS SO
ER
RT
U
O
NO
21
FO
Donna M. Ryu
Ryu
nna M.
United States o
Judge D Magistrate Judge
20
LI
19
IT IS SO ORDERED.
UNIT
ED
18
ISTRIC
ES D
TC
AT
T
RT
U
O
S
17
A
16
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATED REQUEST TO CHANGE TIME
3
CASE NO. CV-11-6239 (MMC) (DMR)
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?