Toppan Photomasks, Inc. v. Park
Filing
105
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND ORDER. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on December 3, 2014. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/3/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
DANIELLE L. OCHS, CA Bar No. 178677
danielle.ochs@ogletreedeakins.com
BECKI D. GRAHAM, CA Bar No. 238010
becki.graham@ogletreedeakins.com
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
Steuart Tower, Suite 1300
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone:
415.442.4810
Facsimile:
415.442.4870
Attorneys for Plaintiff
TOPPAN PHOTOMASKS, INC.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
MARC N. BERNSTEIN, CA Bar No. 145837
mbernstein@blgrp.com
WILL B. FITTON, CA Bar No. 182818
wfitton@blgrp.com
THE BUSINESS LITIGATION GROUP. P.C.
555 Montgomery St., Suite 1650
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
415.765.6633
Facsimile:
415.283.4804
Attorneys for Defendant
KEUN TAEK PARK
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
18
19
TOPPAN PHOTOMASKS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
20
21
22
23
Case No. 3:13-cv-03323-MMC
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION
AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
vs.
KEUN TAEK PARK, an individual,
Complaint Filed: July 15, 2013
Trial Date:
April 20, 2015
Judge:
Hon. Maxine M. Chesney
Defendant.
24
25
26
27
28
Case No.: 3:13-cv-03323-MMC
STIPULATED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
1
2
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION
WHEREAS, on July 17, 2013, Plaintiff Toppan Photomasks, Inc. (“Plaintiff” or “TPI”)
3
filed the above-captioned action (the “Litigation”) against Defendant Keun Taek Park
4
(“Defendant” or “Mr. Park”) (collectively, the “Parties”)
5
6
WHEREAS TPI contends Mr. Park misappropriated trade secrets belonging to TPI, and
breached one or more contracts between him and TPI;
7
WHEREAS Mr. Park denies each of TPI’s allegations; and
8
WHEREAS, the Parties now wish to end the litigation, and have agreed as a basis for doing
9
so to stipulate and agree to the issuance of a permanent injunction, as set forth herein (and agree to
10
11
12
13
request that the Court so order);
NOW THEREFORE, the Parties stipulate and agree, and request the Court enter an order
(the “Order”), as follows:
1.
The Parties agree that from the date the Court issues this order, continuing for a
14
period of ten (10) years thereafter, unless the Court otherwise orders, Defendant (and anyone acting
15
on his behalf who receives actual notice of this Stipulation and Proposed Order) is hereby
16
permanently restrained and enjoined from the following conduct:
17
a.
Accessing TPI’s computer systems or networks;
18
b.
Possessing, using, or disclosing any document or electronically stored
19
information (as defined by FRCP Rule 34(a)(1)(a)) that belongs to TPI and relates to TPI’s plasma
20
creation and dry etching processes, and that contains information that either:
21
1. TPI has designated as a trade secret in the Litigation; or
22
2. is otherwise a TPI trade secret.
23
Such a document or instance of electronically stored information shall be referred to here as a
24
“Confidential TPI Document;” or
25
26
27
28
3.
c.
Park otherwise has a duty to return to TPI.
”Possessing” a Confidential TPI Document, as used in this Order, means
having possession, custody, or control of the Confidential TPI Document.
d.
“Using” a Confidential TPI Document, as used in this Order, means to refer,
1
Case No.: 3:13-cv-03323-MMC
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
1
after the date of this Order, to any Confidential TPI Document for assistance with or use in any
2
dry-etch engineering process or project.
3
e.
“Disclosing” a Confidential TPI Document, as used in this Order, means to
4
refer, after the date of this Order, to any Confidential TPI Document in order to communicate its
5
contents to any other person.
6
2.
Within seventy-two (72) hours of any discovery of TPI Confidential Documents in
7
Defendant’s possession, custody, or control, Defendant shall return such materials to TPI through
8
TPI’s counsel of record along with a written declaration (1) identifying the Confidential TPI
9
Documents discovered, (2) describing their precise location (e.g., found at ______ (place) in a
10
computer file with the following path name: ______ ), and (3) affirming that Defendant has not
11
retained any copies, abstracts, compilations, summaries or any other format reproducing or
12
capturing any of the Confidential TPI Documents.
13
3.
Any Confidential TPI Documents discovered and returned under Paragraph 2 shall
14
be treated as Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only as defined by the Stipulated Protective
15
Order (the “Order”) executed by the Parties in this litigation and shall be handled in a manner
16
consistent with the Order.
17
4.
This order shall survive the dismissal of this action.
18
19
20
DATED: December 2, 2014
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &
STEWART, P.C.
21
22
23
24
By: /s/ Danielle Ochs
DANIELLE L. OCHS
BECKI D. GRAHAM
Attorneys for Plaintiff
TOPPAN PHOTOMASKS, INC.
25
26
27
28
2
Case No.: 3:13-cv-03323-MMC
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
1
DATED: December 2, 2014
THE BUSINESS LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2
3
4
By: /s/ Will B. Fitton
MARC N. BERNSTEIN
WILL B. FITTON
Attorneys for Defendant
KEUN TAEK PARK
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
ATTESTATION OF CONCURRENCE IN FILING
In accordance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I attest that concurrence in the filing of this
document has been obtained from Will B. Fitton.
13
Dated: December 2, 2014
14
15
/s/ Danielle Ochs
DANIELLE L. OCHS
BECKI D. GRAHAM
Attorneys for Plaintiff
16
17
[PROPOSED] ORDER
18
19
SO ORDERED.
20
21
22
23
Dated: __________, 2014
December 3
___________________________________________
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
18658213.3
24
25
26
27
28
3
Case No.: 3:13-cv-03323-MMC
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
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?