Asetek Holdings, Inc et al v. Cooler Master Co., Ltd. et al

Filing 382

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 380 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER filed by Asetek Danmark A/S. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on April 24, 2017. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/24/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Robert F. McCauley (SBN 162056) robert.mccauley@finnegan.com Erik R. Puknys (SBN 190926) erik.puknys@finnegan.com Jacob A. Schroeder (SBN 264717) jacob.schroeder@finnegan.com Jeffrey D. Smyth (SBN 280665) jeffrey.smyth@finnegan.com FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP 3300 Hillview Avenue Palo Alto, California 94304 Telephone: (650) 849-6600 Facsimile: (650) 849-6666 8 9 10 11 12 Arpita Bhattacharyya (pro hac vice) arpita.bhattacharyya@finnegan.com FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP Two Seaport Lane, 6th Floor Boston, MA 02210-2001 Telephone: (617) 646-1600 Facsimile: (617) 646-1666 Reuben H. Chen (SBN 228725) rchen@cooley.com Kyle D. Chen (SBN 239501) kyle.chen@cooley.com COOLEY LLP 3175 Hanover St Palo Alto, CA 94304 Tel: (650) 843-5000 Fax: (650) 849-7400 Attorneys for Defendant CMI USA, INC. Kyle D. Chen (SBN 239501) kyle.chen@cooley.com COOLEY LLP 3175 Hanover St Palo Alto, CA 94304 Tel: (650) 843-5000 Fax: (650) 849-7400 Attorneys for Intervenor COOLER MASTER CO., LTD. 13 14 Attorneys for Plaintiff ASETEK DANMARK A/S 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 17 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 18 19 ASETEK DANMARK A/S, Plaintiff, 20 21 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER v. 22 CASE NO. 3:13-cv-00457-JST CMI USA, INC., fka COOLER MASTER USA, INC. 23 Defendant, 24 and 25 COOLER MASTER CO., LTD 26 Intervenor. 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. 3:13-cv-00457-JST 1 Plaintiff Asetek Danmark A/S (“Asetek”) and Defendant CMI USA, Inc. (“CMI”) 2 (collectively the “Parties”) respectfully submit this joint stipulation. On October 19, 2015, the Court 3 entered its Amended Judgment against CMI and in favor of Asetek in the amount of $639,457.18. 4 DI 339. CMI appealed to the Federal Circuit. Pending its appeal, CMI submitted evidence of a 5 supersedeas bond in the amount of $607,500 (DI 347), as well as a supplemental cash deposit to the 6 Court in the amount of $37,000 which the parties agreed to treat as part of its supersedeas bond (see 7 DI 347-1, DI 347-2), and the Court stayed the execution of judgment. DI 347-2. 8 On April 3, 2017, the United States Court of the Federal Circuit issued its opinion and 9 judgment affirming this Court’s rulings on damages, validity, and infringement. DI 375, DI 376. A 10 11 mandate has been issued and filed. DI 377, DI 378. The Parties jointly request that the Court issue an order lifting the stay on execution of 12 judgment. The Parties stipulate that in addition to the $639,457.18 due to Asetek under the 13 judgment (DI 337), post-judgment interest of $2,178 is due from CMI to Asetek, so that CMI is 14 obligated to pay $641,635.18 to satisfy judgment. 15 Counsel for the parties are cooperating and expect Asetek to also receive CMI’s payment of 16 $607,500 under the bond (DI 347) because CMI has represented that it deposited the full $607,500 17 with a bonding company, and collection efforts are underway. D.I. 347, Ex. 1. With regard to the 18 balance of $34,135.18 owed to Asetek, the Parties stipulate and jointly request that the Court issue 19 an order directing the Court Clerk issue a check in that amount to Asetek Danmark A/S (drawn from 20 CMI’s $37,000 deposit with the Court) and mail it to Robert McCauley (counsel for Asetek), and 21 that the Court issue a check to CMI USA, Inc. for the balance, $2,864.82, and mail it to Kyle Chen 22 (counsel for CMI). 23 This stipulation is submitted without prejudice to any further execution or collection efforts 24 by Asetek in the event the bonding company does not pay Asetek within 30 days from entry of this 25 stipulated order or for other good cause. 26 27 28 ATTESTATION By signature below, counsel for Asetek attests that counsel for CMI concurs in the filing of this document. 1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. 3:13-cv-00457-JST 1 2 Dated: April 19, 2017 Respectfully submitted FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP 3 4 By: 5 6 7 Dated: April 19, 2017 /s/ Robert F. McCauley Robert F. McCauley Attorneys for Plaintiff Asetek Danmark A/S COOLEY LLP 8 9 10 11 By: /s/ Kyle D. Chen Kyle D. Chen Attorneys for Defendants Cooler Master Co., Ltd., CMI USA, Inc., fka Cooler Master USA Inc. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. 3:13-cv-00457-JST [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 2 3 4 5 6 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, AND FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The stay on execution of judgment for Plaintiff Asetek Danmark A/S (“Asetek”) and against Defendant CMI USA, Inc. (“CMI”) is lifted. The Clerk of the Court shall: 1. Issue a check for $34,135.18 made payable to Asetek Danmark A/S (drawn from 7 CMI’s $37,000 prior deposit with the Court (see DI 347-1) and mail it to Robert 8 McCauley, Finnegan, 3300 Hillview Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94304; and 9 2. Issue a check to payable to CMI USA, Inc. for 2,864.82 (the balance on CMI’s 10 $37,000 prior deposit) and mail it to Kyle Chen, Cooley, 3175 Hanover St., Palo 11 Alto, CA 94304. 12 This Order is entered without prejudice to any further execution or collection efforts by 13 Asetek on the $607,500 owed by CMI in the event the bonding company does not pay Asetek within 14 30 days from entry of this order or for other good cause. 18 O The Honorable Jon S. Tigar United States District Judge Northern District of California ar RT 20 NO 19 O IT IS S J u d ge J o 21 22 A H ER n S . Ti g R NIA D __________________________ RDERE FO April 24, 2017 Dated: _________________ LI 17 UNIT ED 16 S IT IS SO ORDERED. RT U O 15 S DISTRICT TE C TA N D IS T IC T R OF C 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. 3:13-cv-00457-JST

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?