Cepheid v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. et al

Filing 75

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 74 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND EXTEND ASSOCIATED DEADLINES filed by Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. Case Management Statement due by 10/3/2013. Case Management Conference set for 10/10/2013 09:00 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 6/7/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/7/2013)

1
2
3
4
5

COOLEY LLP
Mark F. Lambert (197410)
([e-mail])
Lam K. Nguyen (265285)
([e-mail])
Five Palo Alto Square
3000 El Camino Real
Palo Alto, CA 94306-2155
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

FRIED, FRANK, HARRIS, SHRIVER & JACOBSON LLP
Stephen S. Rabinowitz
([e-mail])
Randy Eisensmith (Pro Hac Vice)
([e-mail])
Michael A. Kleinman (Pro Hac Vice)
([e-mail])
One New York Plaza
New York, New York 10004
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
ROCHE MOLECULAR SYSTEMS, INC.

14
15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

18
19

CEPHEID,
Plaintiff,

20
21
22

Case No. 3:12-cv-04411 (EMC)

v.
ROCHE MOLECULAR SYSTEMS, INC.
and F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD.,

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO CONTINUE INITIAL
CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE AND EXTEND
ASSOCIATED DEADLINES

23
Defendants.
24
25
26
27

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1, 6-2, and 7-12, this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order is
entered into by and between Plaintiff Cepheid, Defendant Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., and
Defendant F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. by and through their respective counsel.

28
COOLEY LLP
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
PALO AL TO

Case No. 3:12-cv-04411 (EMC)

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

1

WHEREAS Plaintiff Cepheid filed this declaratory judgment action on August 21, 2012,

2

seeking, inter alia, a declaration that the claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,804,375 (“the ’375 patent”)

3

and 6,127,155 (“the ’155 patent”) are invalid and that Cepheid has not infringed any valid or

4

enforceable claim of the patents. Defendant Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. moved to stay Counts

5

I and II related to the ’375 patent pending final resolution of a Swiss arbitration between the

6

parties, and moved to dismiss Counts III and IV related to the ’155 patent for lack of case or

7

controversy.

8

WHEREAS on January 17, 2013, the Court issued its Order Granting Defendant’s Motion

9

to Stay and Motion to Dismiss (the “Stay and Dismissal Order”). ECF No. 68. The Court stayed

10

Counts I and II until further order of this Court, directing the parties to update the Court within 30

11

days of the issuance of the Arbitral Tribunal’s decision on the issue of jurisdiction. The Court also

12

dismissed Counts III and IV without prejudice.

13

WHEREAS on the same day, the Court also issued its Order Granting Roche Molecular

14

Systems, Inc.’s Administrative Motion to Further Continue Hearing Date for Initial Case

15

Management Conference and Extend Associated Deadlines. ECF No. 69. The Court reset the

16

Initial Case Management Conference from January 31, 2013 to March 14, 2013. On March 5,

17

2013, the parties filed a joint notice apprising the Court that nothing new of substance had

18

occurred in either this case or the pending arbitration since the Court’s Stay and Dismissal Order

19

and suggested that the Court consider rescheduling the Initial Case Management Conference.

20

ECF No. 72. Based on the parties’ joint notice, the Court reset the Initial Case Management

21

Conference to June 20, 2013 and ordered the parties to file a Joint CMC Statement by June 13,

22

2013. ECF No. 73.

23
24

WHEREAS the Arbitral Tribunal has not yet issued its decision on jurisdiction as of the
filing of this Stipulation and Proposed Order;

25

WHEREAS the parties respectfully request that the Court continue the Case Management

26

Conference until after the parties have notified the Court of the Arbitral Tribunal’s decision on

27

jurisdiction in accordance with the Stay and Dismissal Order. (See Declaration of Mark F.

28

Lambert in Support of Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Initial Case Management

COOLEY LLP
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
PALO AL TO

Case No. 3:12-cv-04411 (EMC)

2.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

1

Conference and Extend Associated Deadlines, filed herewith.)

2

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

3

That the Initial Case Management Conference currently scheduled for June 20, 2013 be

4

continued until after the Parties have notified the Court of the Arbitral Tribunal’s decision on

5

jurisdiction; and

6

That the date for the parties’ filing of the Joint CMC Statement be set in accordance with

7

the Initial Case Management Conference.

8

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

9

Dated: June 6, 2013

COOLEY LLP

10
/s/ Mark F. Lambert
Mark F. Lambert
Attorneys for Defendant
ROCHE MOLECULAR SYSTEMS, INC.

11
12
13
14

Dated: June 6, 2013

15
16

FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
/s/ Erik R. Puknys
Erik R. Puknys
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CEPHEID

17
18
19
20

Dated: June 6, 2013

WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND
DORR LLP

21
/s/ Robert J. Gunther, Jr.
Robert J. Gunther, Jr.
Attorneys for Defendant
F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COOLEY LLP
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
PALO AL TO

Case No. 3:12-cv-04411 (EMC)

3.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

FILER’S ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO L.R. 5-1(i)(3)

1
2
3

I, Mark F. Lambert, attest that concurrence in the filing of this STIPULATION AND

4

[PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE INTIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

5

AND EXTEND ASSOCIATED DEADLINES has been obtained from each of the signatories

6

hereto.

7

Executed this 6th day of June, 2013, at Palo Alto, California.

8
9
/s/ Mark F. Lambert
Mark F. Lambert

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COOLEY LLP
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
PALO AL TO

Case No. 3:12-cv-04411 (EMC)

4.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

1

[PROPOSED] ORDER

2

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefore; The CMC is
reset for
10/10/13 at 9:00
a.m. A joint CMC
Statement shall be
IT IS SO ORDERED.
filed by 10/7/13.

S

RT

M. Chen

H

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

FO

LI

ER

A

1138322 /HN

H

13

ORDERED

Judge Edward

NO

RT

12

IT IS SO

ER

United States District Judge
en
d M. Ch
e Edwar
Judg

NO

11

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

10

D
RDERE
S SO O IED
IT I
DIF
AS MO
UNIT
ED

6/7/13

R NIA

9

Dated:

UNIT
ED

8

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

S

7

R NIA

6

FO

5

LI

4

A

3

N

14

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COOLEY LLP
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
PALO AL TO

Case No. 3:12-cv-04411 (EMC)

5.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE