Synopsys, Inc. v. Atoptech, Inc

Filing 732

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION, JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING VERDICT ON BREACH OF CONTRACT, AND ENTRY OF JUDGMENT; DIRECTIONS TO PARTIES. The motions are denied, without prejudice to re-filing aft er the equitable estoppel issue has been resolved. The parties are directed to meet and confer, and submit, no later than April 22, 2016, a joint stipulation as to the manner and schedule upon which said issue will be presented to the Court. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on April 11, 2016. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/11/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

SYNOPSYS, INC.,
Plaintiff,

10

14

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT
PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS
FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION,
JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING
VERDICT ON BREACH OF
CONTRACT, AND ENTRY OF
JUDGMENT; DIRECTIONS TO
PARTIES

15

Re: Dkt. Nos. 723, 727, 729

v.

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 13-cv-02965-MMC

12

ATOPTECH, INC,
Defendant.

13

16
The Court is in receipt of plaintiff Synopsys, Inc.’s “Motion for Permanent
17
Injunction and for Disposition of Infringing Copies and Means,” as well as plaintiff’s “Rule
18
50(b) Motion on Breach of Contract,” and “Motion for Entry of Final Judgment,” each filed
19
April 7, 2016. Said motions would appear to be premature, however, as the issue of
20
equitable estoppel, which defendant ATopTech, Inc. has asserted as an affirmative
21
defense to plaintiff’s copyright infringement claim, remains pending.
22
Accordingly, the above-referenced three motions are hereby DENIED, without
23

prejudice to re-filing 1 after the equitable estoppel issue has been resolved. The parties

24
are hereby DIRECTED to meet and confer, and submit, no later than April 22, 2016, a
25
joint stipulation as to the manner and schedule upon which said issue will be presented to
26
27
1

28

If no changes have been made, chambers copies of the re-filed motions need not
be provided.

1
2
3

the Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 11, 2016
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2