Ai-Daiwa, Ltd. v. Apparent, Inc. et al
Filing
63
Order by Hon. Vince Chhabria granting 62 Stipulation to Extend the Date for Production to the Court Appointed Expert.(knm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/24/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
A Professional Corporation
Redwood City
Ropers Majeski Kohn & Bentley
8
11
12
13
14
15
16
CHI-HUNG A. CHAN (SBN 104289)
LAEL D. ANDARA (SBN 215416)
MICHAEL D. KANACH (271215)
ROPERS, MAJESKI, KOHN & BENTLEY
1001 Marshall Street, Suite 500
Redwood City, CA 94063-2052
Telephone:
(650) 364-8200
Facsimile:
(650) 780-1701
Email:
cchan@rmkb.com
landara@rmkb.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
AI-DAIWA, LTD.
JACQUELINE DESOUZA, (SBN 133686)
DESOUZA LAW OFFICES, PC
1615 HOPKINS STREET
BERKELEY, CA 94707
Tel: (510) 550-0010
Fax: (510) 649-3420
Attorneys for Defendants
APPARENT INC, APPARENT ENERGY INC.,
APPARENT SOLAR INC., AND XSLENT
ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, LLC; APPARENT
SOLAR INVESTMENTS (II), LLC
ERRONEOUSLY SUED HEREIN AS APPARENT
SOLAR INVESTMENTS, LLC and
Counterclaimants Apparent Inc. and Apparent
Energy Inc.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
17
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
AI-DAIWA, LTD.,
Plaintiff,
v.
APPARENT, INC., a Delaware
Corporation; APPARENT ENERGY,
INC., a Delaware Corporation;
APPARENT SOLAR, INC., a Delaware
Corporation; APPARENT SOLAR
INVESTMENTS, LLC, a Hawaii limited
liability company; XSLENT, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company;
XSLENT ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company; and DOES 1-10 inclusive,
RC1/7508310.1/MK6
CASE NO. CV13-4156 VC
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO EXTEND THE DATE FOR
PRODUCTION TO THE COURT
APPOINTED EXPERT
-1-
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
EXTEND THE DATE FOR PRODUCTION TO THE
COURT APPOINTED EXPERT - CV13-4156 VC
1
2
3
Defendants.
AND RELATED CROSS ACTION
4
5
Pursuant to Local Rules 6-1, 6-2, and 7-12, Plaintiff AI-Daiwa, Ltd. (AI-Daiwa) and
Defendants Apparent, Inc., Apparent Energy Inc., Apparent Solar Inc., Xslent Energy
7
Technologies, LLC; Apparent Solar Investments (Ii), LLC erroneously sued herein as Apparent
8
Solar Investments, LLC (collectively “Defendants”) and Apparent Inc and Apparent Energy Inc
9
(collectively Counterclaimants) (all collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their undersigned
10
A Professional Corporation
Redwood City
Ropers Majeski Kohn & Bentley
6
counsel, submit this Stipulated Joint Request to Continue the deadlines for production of
11
documents and devices to the Court-Appointed Expert.
12
WHEREAS, the Court entered an Order on May 16, 2014, appointing Mark McNeely as
13
the Court appointed expert and requiring certain documents and devices be produced to the expert
14
– as set forth in the Order. (See Docket No. 54);
15
WHEREAS, immediately after the Order, the parties’ counsel participated in a conference
16
call with each other to discuss the next steps. That call was followed by a conference call with
17
the Court-Appointed expert, Mr. McNeely. The parties agreed to a procedure for production of
18
data to each other for review and the opportunity to object, if necessary, prior to the production of
19
those documents to Mr. McNeely;
20
WHEREAS, Mr. McNeely was provided publicly available documents from the Court’s
21
docket, including the aforementioned Order (Docket No. 54), AI-Daiwa’s First Amended
22
Complaint (Docket No. 5), Defendants’ Answer and Counterclaims (Docket No. 37), the
23
Stipulation with Proposed Protective Order (Docket No. 42), and the Stipulation with Proposed
24
ESI Order (Docket No. 44). Mr. McNeely signed Exhibit A to the Protective Order –
25
Acknowledgement and Agreement to be Bound;
26
27
28
WHEREAS, when the May 16, 2014 Order was entered, no documents or devices had
been produced in this litigation;
WHEREAS, since that time, the parties have worked diligently to collect and produce
RC1/7508310.1/MK6
-2-
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
EXTEND THE DATE FOR PRODUCTION TO THE
COURT APPOINTED EXPERT - CV13-4156 VC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
A Professional Corporation
Redwood City
Ropers Majeski Kohn & Bentley
8
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
information to the expert, subject to the safeguard referenced above. On May 26, 2014, counsel
for AI-Daiwa visited the manufacturing facilities in Heyuan, China. On June 6, 2014, Apparent
produced three CDs containing emails from three custodians (Stefan Matan, Frank Marrone, and
Jacqueline DeSouza). In a cover letter, Apparent informed AI Daiwa that production was delayed
due to technical issues. Apparent is also working on associating in new counsel, in part, to handle
discovery matters and overcome technical issues that occurred with the recent production;
WHEREAS, to date, counsel for AI-Daiwa has received one potted device and one
un-potted device and is awaiting an additional ten (10) units of MGi devices produced in the
period 2011-2012 and have completed the required testing but have not been delivered to
Apparent for production to the expert;
WHEREAS, Apparent has prepared and has ready for production ten (10) devices that do
not operate and that were not previously used or sold by Apparent, or otherwise modified by
Apparent; and ten (10) devices that failed in the field;
WHEREAS, the Parties are also working to review and approve the appropriate
documentation that should be submitted to the Expert. As set forth in the Order appointing Mr.
McNeely as the Court-Appointed Expert, those documents include the bill of materials used for
the manufacture of the devices; specification sheets for manufacture of the devices; the Supply
Chain Agreement, Addendum, and quality and testing standards provided to AI-Daiwa for the
manufacture of the devices; and additional information the Parties deem relevant. (Docket No. 54,
Paragraphs III.B.3 and III.B.4.)
WHEREAS, the Parties agree to produce documents to the expert within sixty (60) days
of the Court entering the [Proposed] Order attached to this Joint Stipulation to the Court.
WHEREAS, L.R. 6-1 permits the parties to stipulate in writing without a court order, “to
enlarge or shorten the time in matters not required to be filed or lodged with the Court provided
the change will not alter the date of any event or any deadline already fixed by Court order.”
N.D.C.A. Local Rule 6-1;
WHEREAS, the Parties are not aware of any date fixed by Court order that will be altered
28
RC1/7508310.1/MK6
-3-
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
EXTEND THE DATE FOR PRODUCTION TO THE
COURT APPOINTED EXPERT - CV13-4156 VC
1
2
3
by the Parties’ stipulated request, absent the Court’s execution of this [Proposed] Order;
WHEREAS, the requested extension will not otherwise alter the schedule of this case; and
WHEREAS, good cause exists to grant the Parties’ Stipulated Joint Request.
4
5
6
7
9
ORDER STATING:
1. The Parties have sixty (60) days from the entry of the attached Order to produce the
documents and devices set forth in Docket No. 54 to the Court-Appointed Expert Mark McNeely.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
10
11
IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.
12
13
DATED: ______6/20/2014_________ __/Lael D. Andara/_______________________
Attorneys for AI-Daiwa
14
15
16
DATED: ______6/20/2014_________ __/Jacqueline deSouza/____________________
Attorneys for Defendants
17
18
[Proposed] ORDER
19
Dated: June 23, 2014
Honorable Vince Chhabria
United States District Court Judge
ia
Chhabr
e Vi n c e
Judg
24
RT
ER
H
26
LI
NO
25
27
28
RC1/7508310.1/MK6
-4-
FO
23
R NIA
ERED
O ORD
____________________________________
IT IS S
A
22
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
RT
U
O
21
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
S
20
UNIT
ED
A Professional Corporation
Redwood City
Ropers Majeski Kohn & Bentley
8
NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AND JOINTLY REQUEST AN
N
D IS T IC T
R
OF
C
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
EXTEND THE DATE FOR PRODUCTION TO THE
COURT APPOINTED EXPERT - CV13-4156 VC
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?