GeoTag, Inc. v. Zoosk, Inc.

Filing 152

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 150 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER for 30-Day Extension of Remaining Claim Construction Deadlines filed by Zoosk, Inc. Case Management Statement due by 11/25/2013. Further Case Management Conference set for 12/2/2013 02:30 PM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Claims Construction Hearing set for 12/2/2013 02:30 PM. Tutorial Hearing set for 11/18/2013 02:30 PM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 8/15/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/15/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 DANIEL S. MOUNT, ESQ. (CSB No. 77517) dmount@mount.com KEVIN M. PASQUINELLI (CSB No. 246985) kpasquinelli@mount.com MOUNT, SPELMAN & FINGERMAN, P.C. RiverPark Tower, Suite 1650 333 West San Carlos Street San Jose, CA 95110-2740 Telephone: 408.279.7000 Facsimile: 408.998.1474 6 7 8 9 DAVID R. BENNETT (PRO HAC VICE) dbennett@directionip.com DIRECTION IP LAW P.O. BOX 14184 Chicago, IL 60614-0184 Telephone: 312.291.1667 Facsimile: 773.244.1070 10 Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant ZOOSK, INC. MOUNTAIN VIEW 12 ATTORNEYS AT LAW F ENWICK & W EST LLP 11 Attorneys for Plaintiff and CounterclaimDefendant GEOTAG, INC. CHARLENE M. MORROW (CSB No. 136411) cmorrow@fenwick.com PATRICK E. PREMO (CSB No. 184915) ppremo@fenwick.com HECTOR J. RIBERA (CSB No. 221511) hribera@fenwick.com KATHLEEN LU (CSB No. 267032) klu@fenwick.com BRIAN E. LAHTI (CSB No. 278951) blahti@fenwick.com FENWICK & WEST LLP Silicon Valley Center 801 California Street Mountain View, CA 94041 Telephone: 650.988.8500 Facsimile: 650.938.5200 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 16 17 GEOTAG, INC., Plaintiff, 18 19 20 21 22 Case No.: 13-cv-00217-EMC v. JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR 30-DAY EXTENSION OF REMAINING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION DEADLINES ZOOSK, INC., Defendant. Date Action Filed: September 13, 2011 Trial Date: None set AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS. 23 24 Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, Plaintiff GeoTag, Inc. (“GeoTag”) and Defendant Zoosk, Inc. 25 (“Zoosk”) (collectively, the “Parties”), stipulate as recited below and jointly request that the Court 26 amend the current Claim Construction Scheduling Order [Dkt. No. 133] as set forth below. 27 28 WHEREAS, the Court, by Order dated April 2, 2013 [Dkt. No. 133], issued a scheduling order setting forth the case schedule through claim construction; JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR 30-DAY EXTENSION OF REMAINING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION DEADLINES CASE NO.: 13-cv-00217-EMC 1 2 WHEREAS, the Court, by Order dated July 24, 2013 [Dkt. No. 146], amended that schedule by resetting the tutorial from October 16, 2013 to October 18, 2013; 3 4 5 6 WHEREAS, GeoTag’s Supplemental Infringement Contentions were served June 24, 2013; WHEREAS, GeoTag on August 2, 2013 agreed to provide Zoosk amended supplemental infringement contentions; 7 WHEREAS, Zoosk has requested a thirty (30) day extension of all remaining claim 8 construction deadlines to allow GeoTag time to amend its supplemental infringement contentions 9 as discussed at the meet and confer between the parties on August 2, 2013, as well as provide Zoosk the necessary time to review the amended supplemental infringement contentions prior to 11 claim construction; MOUNTAIN VIEW 12 ATTORNEYS AT LAW F ENWICK & W EST LLP 10 13 14 15 WHEREAS, GeoTag does not object to the extension of thirty (30) days of all remaining claim construction deadlines; THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE and jointly request that, in view of the foregoing, the case schedule shall be modified as set forth below: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR 30-DAY EXTENSION OF REMAINING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION DEADLINES 2 CASE NO.: 13-cv-00217-EMC 1 2 Event Current Date Proposed Date 3 4 Parties to submit Joint Claim Construction 8/19/2013 and Prehearing Statement 9/19/2013 5 Opening claim construction briefing by GeoTag 9/9/2013 10/10/2013 6 Responsive claim construction briefing by Zoosk 9/23/2013 10/24/2013 8 Reply claim construction briefing by GeoTag 9/30/2013 10/31/2013 9 Tutorial 10/18/2013 Week of 11/18/2013 at 2:30pm Markman Hearing and Further CMC 10/29/2013 Week of 11/29/2013 12/2/13 at 2:30 p.m. 7 10 MOUNTAIN VIEW 12 ATTORNEYS AT LAW F ENWICK & W EST LLP 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR 30-DAY EXTENSION OF REMAINING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION DEADLINES 3 CASE NO.: 13-cv-00217-EMC 1 Dated: August 14, 2013 FENWICK & WEST LLP 2 3 By: /s/ Brian E. Lahti Brian E. Lahti Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaimants Zoosk, Inc. 4 5 6 7 Dated: August 14, 2013 MOUNT, SPELMAN & FINGERMAN, PC 8 By: /s/ Kevin Pasquinelli Kevin Pasquinelli Attorneys for Plaintiffs and CounterclaimDefendants GeoTag, Inc. 9 10 13 14 15 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 RT 22 dwa Judge E 24 hen rd M. C ER A H 23 DIFIE R NIA 20 AS MO The Honorable Edward M. ChenERED OO D D United States District Judge R IT IS S FO 19 NO 18 RT U O S 17 S DISTRICT TE C TA LI 16 UNIT ED MOUNTAIN VIEW 12 ATTORNEYS AT LAW F ENWICK & W EST LLP 11 N F D IS T IC T O R C 25 26 27 28 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR 30-DAY EXTENSION OF REMAINING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION DEADLINES 4 CASE NO.: 13-cv-00217-EMC 1 ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45 2 Pursuant to General Order No. 45, § X(B), regarding signatures, I attest under penalty of 3 perjury that the concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from its signatories. 4 5 Dated: August 14, 2013 FENWICK & WEST LLP 6 7 By: /s/ Brian E. Lahti Brian E. Lahti Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaimants Zoosk, Inc. 8 9 10 MOUNTAIN VIEW 12 ATTORNEYS AT LAW F ENWICK & W EST LLP 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR 30-DAY EXTENSION OF REMAINING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION DEADLINES 5 CASE NO.: 13-cv-00217-EMC

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?