Lifescan, Inc. et al v. Shasta Technologies, LLC et al

Filing 123

ORDER STAYING PROCEEDINGS re 122 Statement. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 10/08/2013. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/8/2013)

1
2
3
4
5

Gregory L. Diskant (admitted pro hac vice)
Eugene M. Gelernter (admitted pro hac vice)
PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER LLP
1133 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
E-mail:
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Robert P. Andris (SBN 130290)
Lael D. Andara (SBN 215416)
ROPERS, MAJESKI, KOHN & BENTLEY
1001 Marshall Street, Suite 500
Redwood City, CA 94063-2052
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]

6
Attorneys for Defendants Shasta Technologies,
LLC and Conductive Technologies, Inc.

7
8
9
10
11
12

Sue Roeder (S.B. #160897)
O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
2765 Sand Hill Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
E-Mail:
[e-mail]

John J. Shaeffer (S.B. # 138331)
Carole Handler (S.B. # 129381)
Jeff Grant (S.B. # 218974)
LATHROP & GAGE LLP
1888 Century Park East, Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs LifeScan Inc.
and LifeScan Scotland, Ltd.

13
14
15
16

Attorneys for Defendants Decision Diagnostics
Corp. and PharmaTech Solutions, Inc.

17
18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

20

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

21
22

LIFESCAN, INC. and JOHNSON & JOHNSON,

Case No. CV12-6360 (WHO)

23

Plaintiffs,

ORDER STAYING PROCEEDINGS

24

v.

25

SHASTA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, DECISION
DIAGNOSTICS CORP., PHARMATECH
SOLUTIONS, INC., and CONDUCTIVE
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

26
27

Defendants.

28
-15046034v.1
6432445v.1

ORDER GRANTING STAY,
NO. CV12-6360-WHO

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Having reviewed the parties‟ Joint Statement Regarding Staying Causes of Action
submitted in LifeScan, Inc. et al. v. Shasta Technologies, LLC, et al., Case N. 11-cv-04494 (N.D.
Cal.), and pursuant to agreement by all parties and for good cause shown, and subject to the
exceptions set forth in this Order, all proceedings concerning Plaintiffs‟ First, Fifth and Sixth
Claims for Relief, to the extent they do not relate to Defendants‟ use of Plaintiffs‟ trademarks and
trade dress as described in the Complaint at paragraphs 52-67 (see Dkt. No. 1), are hereby stayed
pending a final decision by the Patent Trials and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) in the pending inter
partes review of U.S. Patent No. 7,250,105 (the “„105 Patent”). When the PTAB issues a final
decision in the IPR concerning the „105 Patent, the Court, on the request of any party, may
consider whether the stay provided in this paragraph should, or should not, continue during the
pendency of any appeals from that final decision.

13
14

Any party may move to modify or lift the stay ordered herein for good cause
shown.

15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18
19

Dated: October 8, 2013

20
21

By:
Honorable William H. Orrick
United States District Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-25046034v.1
6432445v.1

ORDER GRANTING STAY
NO. CV12-6360-WHO