Samuels v. TriVascular Corporation

Filing 138

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 136 Dismissing Trivascular's Counterclaims Two Through Five Without Prejudice filed by TriVascular Corporation. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/2/17. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/2/2017)

1
2
3
4

James D. Petruzzi (SBN 115175)
THE PETRUZZI LAW FIRM
4900 Woodway Dr., Suite 745
Houston, Texas 77056
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

Lien K. Dang (Bar No. 254221)
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
3330 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

MARTIN J. SIEGEL
Appearing Pro Hac Vice
Law Offices of Martin J. Siegel
2222 Dunstan
Houston, TX 77005
[phone]
[e-mail]

Natalie Flechsig (Bar No. 300515)
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
555 California Street, 27th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Plaintiff
DR. SHAUN L. W. SAMUELS

Attorneys for Defendants
TRIVASCULAR, INC., MICHAEL A.
CHOBOTOV, PH.D., ROBERT G. WHIRLEY,
PH.D., AND JOSEPH W. HUMPHREY, PH.D.

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

17
18

DR. SHAUN L. W. SAMUELS
Plaintiff,
vs.

19
20

TRIVASCULAR, INC., ET AL.,
Defendants

21
22
23
24
25
26

TRIVASCULAR, INC.
Counter-Claimant,
vs.
DR. SHAUN L. W. SAMUELS
Counter-Defendant

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: CV-13-2261-EMC
Hon. Edward M. Chen
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER DISMISSING TRIVASCULAR’S
COUNTERCLAIMS TWO THROUGH
FIVE WITHOUT PREJUDICE

27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
DISMISSING TRIVASCULAR’S COUNTERCLAIMS
WITHOUT PREJUDICE

CASE NO.: CV-13-2261-EMC

1

The parties through undersigned counsel respectfully submit the following stipulation:

2

WHEREAS, on August 13, 2015, Samuels filed his Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No.

3

77);
WHEREAS, on August 27, 2015, TriVascular filed its counterclaims one (Declaratory

4
5

Judgment of Non-Infringement of the ’575 Patent), two (Declaratory Judgment of Invalidity of the

6

’575 Patent), three (Breach of Co-Investigator Agreements), four (Breach of Settlement Agreement),

7

and five (Promissory Estoppel) against Samuels (Dkt. No. 78);
WHEREAS on September 14, 2015 Samuels filed his answer to TriVascular’s

8
9

counterclaims, denying each counterclaim (i.e., Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement of the

10

’575 Patent; Declaratory Judgment of Invalidity of the ’575 Patent; Breach of Co-Investigator

11

Agreements; Breach of Settlement Agreement; and Promissory Estoppel) (Dkt. No. 80);

12

WHEREAS, on December 17, 2015, this Court entered a final judgment of non-

13

infringement of the ’575 patent (Dkt. No. 98);
WHEREAS, on November 3, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued a judgment and order

14
15

pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 36 affirming this Court’s finding of non-infringement of the ’575 patent

16

(Case 16-1490, Dkt. No. 48);
WHEREAS, on December 29, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued a mandate to this Court (Dkt.

17
18

No. 111);
WHEREAS, TriVascular’s counterclaims two through five remain pending before this

19
20
21

Court;
WHEREAS, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) and 41(c), TriVascular may dismiss its

22

counterclaims two through five without a court order by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all

23

parties who have appeared;

24

WHEREAS, between January 5, 2017 and February 14, 2017, counsel for TriVascular and

25

counsel for Samuels met and conferred regarding TriVascular’s request that Samuels stipulate to

26

dismissal of TriVascular’s counterclaims two through five without prejudice;

27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
DISMISSING TRIVASCULAR’S COUNTERCLAIMS
WITHOUT PREJUDICE

1

CASE NO.: CV-13-2261-EMC

1

WHEREAS, in an effort to minimize the disputes between the parties and in the interests of

2

conserving judicial and party resources, Samuels agreed on February 14, 2017 to TriVascular’s

3

request to dismiss TriVascular’s counterclaims two through five without prejudice;

4

WHEREAS, on February 15, 2017, Samuels filed Plaintiff’s Objection to Reply Evidence

5

Under Local Rule 7-3 in which he stated that “Samuels has now agreed to a dismissal without

6

prejudice [of TriVascular’s counterclaims] in order to avoid future litigation and expense.” (Dkt.

7

No. 134 at 4).

8

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED THAT:

9

TriVascular’s counterclaims two through five may be dismissed without prejudice.

10
11

DATED: March 1, 2017

12

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ James D. Petruzzi
James D. Petruzzi (SBN 115175)
THE PETRUZZI LAW FIRM
4900 Woodway Dr., Suite 745
Houston, Texas 77056
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

13
14
15
16
17

MARTIN J. SIEGEL
Appearing Pro Hac Vice
Law Offices of Martin J. Siegel
2222 Dunstan
Houston, TX 77005
[phone]
[e-mail]

18
19
20
21
22

Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dr. SHAUN L. W. SAMUELS

23
24

/s/ Lien K. Dang
Lien K. Dang (Bar No. 254221)
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
3330 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
DISMISSING TRIVASCULAR’S COUNTERCLAIMS
WITHOUT PREJUDICE

2

CASE NO.: CV-13-2261-EMC

1
2

Natalie Flechsig (Bar No. 300515)
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
555 California Street, 27th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

3
4
5
6

Attorneys for Defendants
TRIVASCULAR, INC., MICHAEL
A.CHOBOTOV, PH.D., ROBERT G.
WHIRLEY, PH.D., AND JOSEPH W.
HUMPHREY, PH.D.

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
DISMISSING TRIVASCULAR’S COUNTERCLAIMS
WITHOUT PREJUDICE

3

CASE NO.: CV-13-2261-EMC

1

4

that TriVascular’s counterclaims two through five are dismissed without prejudice, pursuant to Fed.
R. Civ. P. 41.

S
UNIT
ED

RT
U
O

5

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

6

______________________
HON. EDWARD M.RDERED
CHEN
SO O
IS District Judge
IT
United States

7
8

Chen

LI
A

ATTESTATION OF SIGNATURES
E

H

12

dw
Judge E

RT

10
11

ard M.

NO

9

R NIA

3

2nd
March
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED this ____ day of ________, 2017

FO

2

[PROPOSED] ORDER

C

R

I, Lien K. Dang, attest that all signatories listed, and onN D behalf the filing is submitted,
whose
OF

IS T RIC T

concur in the filing’s content and have authorized the filing.

13
14
15

Dated: March 1, 2017

16

KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
/s/ Lien K. Dang
Lien K. Dang

17

Attorney for Defendants
TRIVASCULAR, INC., MICHAEL
A.CHOBOTOV, PH.D., ROBERT G.
WHIRLEY, PH.D., AND JOSEPH W.
HUMPHREY, PH.D

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

PROPOSED ORDER AND ATTESTATION OF SIGNATURES

CASE NO.: CV-13-2261-EMC