EMC Corporation v. Bright Response, LLC

Filing 70

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 69 DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 1/14/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/14/2013)

1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Charles K. Verhoeven (CA Bar No. 170151)
2 Antonio R. Sistos (CA Bar No. 238847)
Emily C. O’Brien (CA Bar No. 240072)
3
Andrew M. Holmes (CA Bar No. 260475)
4 50 California Street, 22nd Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
5 Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
6 Email:
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
7
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
8
9 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Patrick Curran (Pro Hac Vice)
10 Alexander Rudis (Pro Hac Vice)
11 51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
New York, NY 10010
[phone]
12 Telephone:
Facsimile:
[phone]
13 Email:
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
14
15
16 Attorneys for Plaintiff EMC Corporation
17
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
18
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
19
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
20
21

CASE NO. 3:12-cv-02841-EMC

22 EMC CORPORATION,

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER

23
24

Plaintiff,
[Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2), (c)]
vs.

25
BRIGHT RESPONSE, LLC,
26
Defendant.

27
28
02961.62479/5127868.1

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
CASE NO. 3:12-cv-02841-EMC

1

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) and (c), plaintiff EMC Corporation and

2 defendant Bright Response, LLC hereby stipulate to an order dismissing (1) plaintiff’s declaratory
3 judgment claim of non-infringement WITH PREJUDICE; and (2) plaintiff’s declaratory judgment claim of
4 invalidity WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

There currently are no claims or counterclaims being asserted by

5 defendant in this action. Each party shall bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

6
7

CAME ON THIS DAY for consideration of the Stipulation of Dismissal of all claims asserted by

8 plaintiff EMC Corporation in the above-captioned action, and the Court being of the opinion that said
9 Stipulation should be GRANTED.
10

It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that (1) plaintiff’s declaratory

11 judgment claim of non-infringement is hereby dismissed WITH PREJUDICE; and (2) plaintiff’s
12 declaratory judgment claim of invalidity is hereby dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE. It is further
13 ORDERED that all attorneys’ fees and costs are to be borne by the party that incurred them.
14
SO STIPULATED:

15
16

DATED: January 11, 2013

17

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
By /s/ Patrick Curran
Patrick Curran

18
19

Attorneys for Plaintiff EMC Corporation

20
21

DATED: January 11, 2013

BLACK CHANG & HAMILL LLP

22
23

By /s/ Andrew Hamill
Andrew Hamill

24

Attorneys for Defendant Bright Response, LLC

25
26
27
28
02961.62479/5127868.1

2
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
CASE NO. 3:12-cv-02841-EMC

1
2

ATTESTATION
I, Andrew M. Holmes, hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has

3 been obtained from Andrew Hamill, counsel for Bright Response, LLC. I declare under penalty of
4 perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
5

Executed this 11th day of January, 2013 in San Francisco, California.

6
By /s/ Andrew M. Holmes
Andrew M. Holmes

7
8
9
10

S

_____________________________
United States District Judge

dw
Judge E

15

RT

ER

18

Chen

A

H

17

ard M.

LI

16

R NIA

14

DERED

FO

13

O OR
IT IS S

NO

1/14/13
DATED: ______________________

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

12

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNIT
ED

11

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
02961.62479/5127868.1

3
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
CASE NO. 3:12-cv-02841-EMC