Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corporation
Filing
234
Order by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu granting 232 Stipulation.(dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/8/2014)
Case3:12-cv-06467-MMC Document232 Filed08/07/14 Page1 of 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
David T. Pritikin (Pro Hac Vice)
dpritikin@sidley.com
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
1 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 853-7000
Facsimile: (312) 853-7036
George A. Riley (SBN 118304)
griley@omm.com
Mark E. Miller (SBN 130200)
markmiller@omm.com
Luann L. Simmons (SBN 203526)
lsimmons@omm.com
Michael Sapoznikow (SBN 242640)
msapoznikow@omm.com
O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP
Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
(415) 984-8700
Facsimile:
(415) 984-8701
M. Patricia Thayer (SBN 90818)
pthayer@sidley.com
Philip W. Woo (SBN 196459)
pwoo@sidley.com
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
555 California Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 772-1200
Facsimile: (415) 772-7400
Kristin L. Cleveland (SBN 184639)
kristin.cleveland@klarquist.com
Salumeh R. Loesch (Pro Hac Vice)
salumeh.loesch@klarquist.com
Jeffrey S. Love (SBN 195068)
jeffrey.love@klarquist.com
Andrew M. Mason (Pro Hac Vice)
andrew.mason@klarquist.com
John D. Vandenberg (Pro Hac Vice)
john.vandenberg@klarquist.com
KLARQUIST SPARKMAN, LLP
121 S.W. Salmon Street, Suite 1600
Portland, OR 97204
Telephone:
(503) 595-5300
Facsimile:
(503) 595-5301
I. Neel Chatterjee (SBN 173985)
nchatterjee@orrick.com
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
1000 Marsh Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Telephone: (650) 614-7400
Facsimile: (650) 614-7401
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SYNOPSYS, INC.
15
Attorneys for Defendant
MENTOR GRAPHICS CORPORATION
16
17
18
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
19
NORTHERN DISTRICT CALIFORNIA - SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
20
SYNOPSYS, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
21
22
23
24
25
Plaintiff,
vs.
MENTOR GRAPHICS CORPORATION, an
Oregon Corporation,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 3:12-cv-06467-MMC (DMR)
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REGARDING SYNOPSYS, INC.’S
PRODUCTS
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING SYNOPSYS INC.’S PRODUCTS – CASE NO. 3:12-CV-06467-MMC
Case3:12-cv-06467-MMC Document232 Filed08/07/14 Page2 of 3
1
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-12 and Local Patent Rule 3-6, Plaintiff Synopsys, Inc.
2
(“Synopsys”) and Defendant Mentor Graphics Corporation (“Mentor Graphics”) jointly submit this
3
stipulated motion.
4
WHEREAS, Synopsys identified a total of 26 asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,530,841
5
(the “‘841 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 5,680,318 (the “‘318 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 5,748,488 (the
6
“‘488 patent”), 1 and U.S. Patent No. 6,836,420 (the “‘420 patent”) (collectively, the “Asserted
7
Patents”) in its Infringement Contentions served on April 12, 2013 in this case;
8
9
10
WHEREAS, Mentor Graphics identified 39 prior art references and products for the
Gregory patents, and 31 prior art references and products for the ‘420 patent in its First Amended
Invalidity Contentions served January 29, 2014 in this case;
11
12
WHEREAS, the Court has stayed “all proceeding on the ‘420 patent pending completion of
trial on inter partes review of said patent by the Patent Trial and Appeals Board” (Dkt. No. 215);
13
14
WHEREAS, Synopsys and Mentor Graphics seek to further streamline and narrow the
issues in the case as it moves forward;
15
IT IS, THEREFORE, AGREED AND STIPULATED, AS FOLLOWS:
16
By August 7, 2014 Synopsys will elect 8 claims total for the Gregory patents.
17
By August 14, 2014 Mentor will elect 6 prior art references for the Gregory patents.
18
For purposes of this Stipulation, a prior art instrumentality (such as a device or process)
19
and associated references that describe that prior art instrumentality shall count as one prior art
20
reference, as shall the closely related work of a single prior artist.
21
22
Respectfully submitted,
23
24
Dated: August 7, 2014
By: /s/ Philip W. Woo
Philip W. Woo
25
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SYNOPSYS, INC.
26
27
28
1
The ‘841. ‘318, and ‘488 patents are related, have the same inventors (Brent L. Gregory and Russell B. Segal), and are
collectively referred to as the “Gregory patents.”
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING SYNOPSYS INC.’S PRODUCTS – CASE NO. 3:12-CV-06467-MMC
Case3:12-cv-06467-MMC Document232 Filed08/07/14 Page3 of 3
1
Dated: August 7, 2014
By: /s/ Andy Mason
Andy Mason
2
Attorneys for Defendant
MENTOR GRAPHICS CORPORATION
3
4
5
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), counsel for Synopsys has obtained the concurrence of
6
Defendant’s counsel in the filing of this stipulation.
7
8
Dated: August 7, 2014
By: /s/ Philip W. Woo
Philip W. Woo
9
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SYNOPSYS, INC.
10
11
12
13
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
14
15
Dated:
August 8, 2014
DONNA M. RYU
United States Magistrate Judge
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING SYNOPSYS INC.’S PRODUCTS – CASE NO. 3:12-CV-06467-MMC
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?