EON Corp IP Holdings LLC v. Sensus USA Inc et al
Filing
365
STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE ADR CERTIFICATION AND STIPULATION TO ADR PROCESS. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 6/6/12. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/6/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
STEVE MOORE (NC Bar No. . 23367)
CARL E. SANDERS (NC Bar No. 34190)
JAMES L. HOWARD (NC 39769)
1001 West Fourth Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27101-2400
Telephone: 336 607 7300; Facsimile: 336 607 7500
E-mail: smoore@kilpatricktownsend.com
E-mail: csanders@kilpatricktownsend.com
E-mail: jihoward@kilpatricktownsend.com
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
JESSICA L. HANNAH (State Bar No. 261802)
Two Embarcadero Center, 8th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: 415-576-0200; Facsimile: 415-576-0300
Email: jhannah@kilpatricktownsend.com
Attorneys for Defendants
MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. AND MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
15
EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC,
Plaintiff,
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
v.
SENSUS USA INC.; ARUBA NETWORKS,
INC.; BROADSOFT, INC.; CLAVISTER
AB; IP.ACCESS, INC.; JUNI AMERICA,
INC.; CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.; MAVENIR
SYSTEMS, INC.; MERU NETWORKS,
INC.; SERCOMM CORPORATION;
SONUS NETWORKS, INC.; SPRINT
SPECTRUM, L.P.; ADVANCED
METERING DATA SYSTEMS, LLC;
STOKE, INC.; TATARA SYSTEMS, INC.;
HTC AMERICA, INC.; PALM, INC.;
UNITED STATES CELLULAR
CORPORATION; CELLULAR SOUTH,
INC.; NTELOS, INC.; MOTOROLA
MOBILITY, INC.; MOTOROLA
SOLUTIONS, INC.; KINETO WIRELESS,
INC.; and AIRVANA, INC.,
Defendants.
Defendants.
AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS
Case No. C12-01011 EMC
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE ADR
CERTIFICATION AND STIPULATION
TO ADR PROCESS OR NOTICE OF
NEED FOR ADR TELEPHONE
CONFERENCE ; ORDER
[CIVIL L.R. 6-2]
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE ADR CERTIFICATION AND STIPULATION TO
ADR PROCESS OR NOTICE OF NEED FOR ADR TELEPHONE CONFERENCE
CASE NO. C12-01011 MEJ
1
Plaintiff EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC and Defendants Aruba Networks, Inc., Broadsoft,
2
Inc., Cisco Systems, Inc., Mavenir Systems, Inc., Meru Networks, Inc., Sercomm Corporation,
3
Sonus Networks, Inc., Sprint Spectrum, L.P., Stoke, Inc., Tatara Systems, Inc., HTC America,
4
Inc., United States Cellular Corporation, Motorola Mobility, Inc., Motorola Solutions, Inc., Kineto
5
Wireless, Inc., and Airvana Inc. (“the parties”) hereby request an extension of time to file the ADR
6
Certification and a Stipulation to ADR Process or Notice of Need for ADR Telephone Conference
7
(“ADR Documents”) pursuant to Northern District Civil L. R. 16-8 and ADR L. R. 3-5.
8
All parties, with the exception of Clavister AB and Juni America, Inc., met and conferred
9
this morning regarding the Joint Case Management Conference Statement and the ADR programs
10
made available by this Court. While no agreement was reached between the parties this morning
11
with respect to ADR, the parties believe that an extension of two weeks to file the ADR
12
Documents will provide sufficient time for the parties to continue to meet and confer regarding
13
ADR and reach a position to file the ADR Documents. There have been no previous time
14
modifications in the case. A two week extension of time will require that the parties file both the
15
ADR Documents and Case Management Statement on June 15, 2012 and will have no effect on
16
the schedule for the case. For the foregoing reasons, the parties hereby request that the Court
17
grant the instant request and extend the deadline to file the ADR Documents to June 15, 2012.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
DATED: June 1, 2012
Respectfully submitted,
2
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
3
By: /s/ Jessica L. Hannah
4
Jessica L. Hannah (State Bar No. 261802)
5
Attorneys for Defendants
MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. AND MOTOROLA
MOBILITY, INC.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
By: /s/ Brian Range
Attorneys for Defendant
ARUBA NETWORKS, INC.;
COOLEY LLP
By: /s/ Justin Wilcox
Attorneys for Defendant
BROADSOFT, INC.
WILEY REIN LLP
By: /s/ Brian Pandya
Attorneys for Defendant
IP.ACCESS, INC.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
By: /s/ Matthew Yungwirth
Attorneys for Defendant
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
ANDREWS KURTH LLP
By: /s/ Gerald Conley
Attorneys for Defendant
MAVENIR SYSTEMS, INC.
27
28
3
1
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
2
By: /s/ Diana Luo
3
Attorneys for Defendant
MERU NETWORKS, INC.
4
5
ANDREWS KURTH LLP
6
By: /s/ Robert A. Gutkin
7
Attorneys for Defendant
SERCOMM CORPORATION
8
9
DUANE MORRIS LLP
10
By: /s/ Matthew Yungwirth
11
Attorneys for Defendant
SONUS NETWORKS, INC.
12
13
K&L GATES LLP
14
By: /s/ Andrea B. Reed
15
Attorneys for Defendant
SPRINT SPECTRUM, L.P.
16
17
BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.
18
By: /s/ Douglas Kubehl
19
Attorneys for Defendant
STOKE, INC.
20
21
HENNIGAN BENNETT AND DORMAN
22
By: /s/ Lawrence M. Hadley
23
Attorneys for Defendant
TATARA SYSTEMS, INC.
24
25
AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD
26
By: /s/ Kellie M. Johnson
27
Attorneys for Defendant
HTC AMERICA, INC.
28
4
1
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
2
By: /s/ Ashish Nagdev
3
Attorneys for Defendant
UNITED STATES CELLULAR CORPORATION
4
5
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
6
By: /s/ Brian Range
7
Attorneys for Defendant
KINETO WIRELESS, INC.
8
9
SIMPLSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP
10
By: /s/ Patrick King
11
Attorneys for Defendant
AIRVANA, INC.
12
13
HOPKINS & CARLEY
14
By: /s/ Jennifer Coleman
15
Attorneys for Plaintiff
EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC
16
17
18
19
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
27
S
ER
H
26
R NIA
FO
RT
25
NO
24
ERED
By: __________________________
O ORD
IT IS S
Hon. Edward Chen
United States District Court Judge
Chen
ard M.
dge Edw
Ju
LI
23
June 6
Dated: ______________________, 2012
A
22
RT
U
O
21
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
UNIT
ED
20
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
28
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
SIGNATURE ATTESTATION
Pursuant to general Order No. 45(X)(B), I hereby certify that I have obtained the
concurrence in the filing of this document from all the signatories for whom a signature is
indicated by a “conformed” signature (/s/) within this e-filed document and I have on file records
to support this concurrence for subsequent production for the court if so ordered or for inspection
7
upon request.
8
DATED:
9
June 1, 2012
By: /s/ Jessica L. Hannah
Jessica L. Hannah
Attorneys for Defendants
MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. AND
MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.
10
11
12
13
3306848 v1
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
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?