Activevideo Networks, Inc v. Trans Video Electronics, Ltd

Filing 26

ORDER re 8 Supplemental Evidence. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 8/12/2013. (emclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/12/2013)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

ACTIVEVIDEO NETWORKS, INC.,

9

Plaintiff,
v.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

ORDER RE SUPPLEMENTAL
EVIDENCE

TRANS VIDEO ELECTRONICS, LTD.,

12

No. C-13-1980 EMC

Defendant.
___________________________________/

(Docket No. 8)
13
14
15

The Court has reviewed the sur-reply filed by Plaintiff ActiveVideo Networks, Inc. (“AV”),

16

in which it argues, inter alia, that the covenant not to sue proposed by Trans Video Electronics, Ltd.

17

is inadequate. AV asserts, for instance, that the covenant is deficient because it covers only AV and

18

not any of its customers. The Court hereby orders AV to provide evidence as to whether it has

19

indemnity agreements with its customers. See, e.g., Microchip Technology Inc. v. Chamberlain

20

Group, 441 F.3d 936 (Fed. Cir. 2006); Visto Corp. v. Sproqit Techs., Inc., No. C-04-0651 EMC,

21

2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96173 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2006).

22

The supplemental evidence shall be filed by August 15, 2013.

23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24
25

Dated: August 12, 2013

26
27
28

_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge