Altera Corporation v. Mosaid Technologies Inc.

Filing 55

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINES RELATING TO ITS MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE 41 (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 6/4/2012)

1
2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
No. C 12-0342 SI

ALTERA CORPORATION,
6

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINES
RELATING TO ITS MOTION TO
DISMISS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE
MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE

Plaintiff,
7
v.
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

MOSAID TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
and LSI CORPORATION,
Defendants.

/

11
12

On May 21, 2012, the Court granted plaintiff Altera Corp.’s motion to conduct expedited

13

jurisdictional discovery, requiring the disclosure by defendant MOSAID Technologies, Inc. of numerous

14

categories of information related to its contacts with California. See dkt. 40. The jurisdictional

15

discovery is necessary for Altera’s opposition to MOSAID’s motion to dismiss. That opposition is

16

currently due on June 8, 2012, and the motion is set for hearing on June 29, 2012. Pursuant to a prior

17

Court order, Altera requested that the jurisdictional discovery be complete by May 31, 2012.

18

MOSAID has filed a motion to extend deadlines related to the motion to dismiss. MOSAID

19

argues that it is working diligently to provide the information requested by Altera, but cannot complete

20

its obligations under the current deadlines. It therefore requests a one-month extension of the deadlines

21

related to the motion to dismiss. Altera opposes the extension, arguing that it is effectively a motion

22

for reconsideration and is thus defective as it “simply echo[es]” the arguments made by MOSAID in

23

opposing the request for expedited discovery, and that Altera will be prejudiced by a month of delay.

24

The Court finds that a month extension of all deadlines is reasonable. Altera requested a broad

25

swath of documents related to MOSAID’s connections to California, including all licensing agreements

26

with California entities, financial statements showing revenue that MOSAID has earned from business

27

with California entities since January 2006, and documents related to seminars or conferences that

28

MOSAID attended in California. Even if MOSAID is correct that its contacts with California are

1

limited, the nature of these documents may take time to collect and review.

2

The June 29, 2012 hearing date for the motion to dismiss is hereby VACATED. The hearing

3

is rescheduled for July 27, 2012. The deadline for production of jurisdictional discovery is June 29,

4

2012; Altera’s opposition to MOSAID’s motion is due July 9, 2012, and MOSAID’s reply is due July

5

16, 2012.

6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
9

Dated: June 4, 2012
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2