GeoTag, Inc. v. Zoosk, Inc.
Filing
172
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 170 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER [JOINT] FOR EXTENSION OF REMAINING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION DEADLINES filed by Zoosk, Inc. Claims Construction Hearing reset for 4/28/2014 02:30 PM. Tutorial Hearing reset for 4/14/2014 02:30 PM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 12/17/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/17/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
MOUNTAIN VIEW
12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
F ENWICK & W EST LLP
11
13
14
15
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
JEFFREY A. TINKER
(PRO HAC VICE PENDING)
jtinker@winstead.com
Winstead PC
500 Winstead Building
2728 N. Harwood Street
Dallas, Texas 75201
JOSEPH A. GRECO (Cal. Bar No. 104476)
jgreco@beckllp.com
KIMBERLY P. ZAPATA (Cal. Bar No. 138291)
kzapata@beckllp.com
Beck, Bismonte & Finley, LLP
150 Almaden Boulevard, 10th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Telephone: 408.938.7900
Facsimile: 408.938.0790
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
Attorneys for Defendant and
Counterclaimant
ZOOSK, INC.
Attorneys for Plaintiff and CounterclaimDefendant
GEOTAG, INC.
16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
17
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
18
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
19
20
GEOTAG, INC.,
Case No.: 13-cv-00217-EMC
21
Plaintiff,
22
v.
23
JOINT STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER FOR
EXTENSION OF REMAINING CLAIM
CONSTRUCTION DEADLINES
ZOOSK, INC.,
24
Defendant.
Date Action Filed: September 13, 2011
Trial Date: None set
25
26
AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS.
27
28
JOINT STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXT.
OF REMAINING CLAIM CONST. DEADLINES
CASE NO.: 13-cv-00217-EMC
1
Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2 and Local Rule 7-12, Plaintiff GeoTag, Inc. (“GeoTag”) and
2
Defendant Zoosk, Inc. (“Zoosk”) (collectively, the “Parties”), stipulate as recited below and
3
jointly request that the Court amend the current Claim Construction Scheduling Order [Dkt. No.
4
133] as set forth below.
5
6
7
8
9
WHEREAS, the Court, by Order dated April 2, 2013 [Dkt. No. 133], issued a scheduling
order setting forth the case schedule through claim construction;
WHEREAS, the Court, modified that schedule by orders dated July 24, 2013 [Dkt. No.
146], August 15, 2013 [Dkt. No. 152] and October 2, 2013 [Dkt. No. 164];
WHEREAS, the October 2, 2013 modification reset GeoTag’s opening claim construction
briefing to December 23, 2013, Zoosk’s responsive claim construction briefing to January 6,
11
2014, and the Markman hearing to February 10, 2014;
MOUNTAIN VIEW
12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
F ENWICK & W EST LLP
10
WHEREAS, GeoTag’s trial in the case titled GeoTag, Inc. v. Frontier Communc’s Corp.
13
et al., Case No. 2:10-cv-00265-JRG (E.D. Tex. filed July 23, 2010) (Gilstrap, J.) has been reset
14
from December 2, 2013 to March 10, 2014;
15
WHEREAS, GeoTag is set to begin trial in the case titled Microsoft Corp. et al. v.
16
GeoTag, Inc., Case No. 11-cv-00175-RGA (D. Del. filed March 1, 2011) (Andrews, J.) on April
17
21, 2014;
18
19
20
WHEREAS, new counsel of record for GeoTag entered appearances on November 13,
2013 [Dkt. Nos. 167 and 168] and on December 10, 2103 [Dkt. No. 169];
WHEREAS, the Parties agree to the below extension of all remaining claim construction
21
deadlines to allow new counsel for GeoTag the necessary time to come up to speed to this action,
22
as well as, to allow the Court the benefit of the rulings from GeoTag’s trial in the Eastern District
23
of Texas;
24
25
26
27
THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE and jointly request that, in view of the foregoing,
the case schedule shall be modified as set forth below:
Event
Opening claim construction briefing by
GeoTag
Current Date
Proposed Date
12/23/2013
2/24/2014
28
JOINT STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXT.
OF REMAINING CLAIM CONST. DEADLINES
1
CASE NO.: 13-cv-00217-EMC
1
Responsive claim construction briefing by
Zoosk
1/6/2014
3/10/2014
3
Reply claim construction briefing by
GeoTag
1/13/2014
3/17/2014
4
Tutorial
1/27/2014
Week of 4/14/2014 2:30 pm
5
Markman Hearing and Further CMC
2/10/2014
Week of 4/21/2014
4/28/14 2:30pm
2
6
7
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 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXT.
OF REMAINING CLAIM CONST. DEADLINES
2
CASE NO.: 13-cv-00217-EMC
1
Dated: December 13, 2013 2013
FENWICK & WEST LLP
2
3
By: /s/ Brian E. Lahti
Brian E. Lahti
Attorneys for Defendant and
Counterclaimant
Zoosk, Inc.
4
5
6
7
BECK, BISMONTE & FINLEY, LLP
Dated: December 13, 2013
8
By: /s/ Kimberly P. Zapata
Kimberly P. Zapata
Attorneys for Plaintiff and CounterclaimDefendant
GeoTag, Inc.
9
10
13
14
15
20
RT
U
O
19
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
The Honorable Edward M. Chen
United States District Judge
21
DERED
SO OR ED
IT IS
DIFI
AS MO
22
n
M. Che
LI
ER
A
H
25
RT
24
NO
23
dward
Judge E
R NIA
18
FO
17
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO
ORDERED. (as modified)
S
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
26
27
28
JOINT STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXT.
OF REMAINING CLAIM CONST. DEADLINES
3
CASE NO.: 13-cv-00217-EMC
1
2
3
ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45
Pursuant to General Order No. 45, § X(B), regarding signatures, I attest under penalty of
perjury that the concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from its signatories.
4
5
Dated: December 13, 2013
FENWICK & WEST LLP
6
7
By: /s/ Brian E. Lahti
Brian E. Lahti
Attorneys for Defendant and
Counterclaimant
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 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXT.
OF REMAINING CLAIM CONST. DEADLINES
4
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?