Wang v. Palo Alto Networks, Inc. et al

Filing 98

ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO ALLOW NIR ZUK TO PROVIDE THE SCHEDULEDTECHNOLOGY TUTORIAL by Hon. William Alsup denying 96 Motion.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/19/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 8 QIANG WANG, Plaintiff, 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 v. ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO ALLOW NIR ZUK TO PROVIDE THE SCHEDULED TECHNOLOGY TUTORIAL PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC., NIR ZUK, and FENGMIN GONG, Defendants. / 13 14 No. C 12-05579 WHA Defendants have filed an administrative motion to allow Nir Zuk, defendant and Chief 15 Technology Officer of Palo Alto Networks, Inc. (“PAN”), to provide the technology tutorial 16 currently scheduled for February 12, 2014. Defendants have stated that if the motion is granted 17 (and plaintiff desires), defendants “would agree that Plaintiff could likewise have a person with 18 technical expertise (not a retained expert) present Plaintiff’s tutorial” (Dkt. No. 96). 19 Plaintiff opposes. Plaintiff argues that defendants’ proposal is not an equal exchange 20 because “Mr. Zuk has intimate knowledge of PAN’s Accused Systems and its non-infringement 21 positions, and Mr. Wang does not (given that the protective order bars him from viewing 22 essentially every technical document in this action)” (Dkt. No. 97). 23 The September 2013 order states “[a] tutorial for the Court (to be conducted by counsel 24 only, not experts) shall be set for February 12, 2014 at 1:30 p.m.” (Dkt. No. 94). Good cause has 25 not been shown to permit Nir Zir to conduct the technical tutorial. The motion is DENIED. 26 (This is an administrative motion pursuant to Local Rule 7-11; no reply is necessary.) 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 19, 2013. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?