Aylus Networks, Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Filing 225

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 224 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER REGARDING FACT DISCOVERY filed by Aylus Networks, Inc. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 12/3/15. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/3/2015)

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &

1 SULLIVAN, LLP

Harold A. Barza (Bar No. 80888)

2 [e-mail]

Amar L. Thakur (Bar No. 194025)

3 [e-mail]

Vincent Pollmeier (Bar No. 210684)

4 [e-mail]
865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor

5 Los Angeles, California 90017-2543
Telephone:

6 Facsimile:

[phone]
[phone]

7 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP

8 Joseph B. Martin (Bar No. 294156)
[e-mail]

9 50 California Street, 22nd Floor

San Francisco, California 94111
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

10 Telephone:
11

Attorneys for Plaintiff

12 Aylus Networks, Inc.
13

MARK D. FOWLER, Bar No. 124235
[e-mail]
CHRISTINE K. CORBETT, Bar No. 209128
[e-mail]
ROBERT BUERGI, Bar No. 242910
[e-mail]
ERIK R. FUEHRER, Bar No. 252578
[e-mail]
JONATHAN HICKS, Bar No. 274634
[e-mail]
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
2000 University Avenue
East Palo Alto, CA 94303-2214
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 650.833.2001
ROBERT WILLIAMS, Bar No. 246990
[e-mail]
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
401 B Street, Suite 1700
San Diego, CA 92101-4297
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
APPLE INC.

14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

17 AYLUS NETWORKS, INC., a Delaware
corporation,
18
Plaintiff,
19
vs.
20
APPLE INC., a California corporation
21
Defendant.
22

CASE NO. 3:13-cv-4700-EMC
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REGARDING FACT
DISCOVERY

23
24
25
26
27
28
05010-00001/7380814.1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING FACT DISCOVERY

1

Pursuant to Magistrate Judge Westmore’s Order of November 2, 2015 (Dkt. 201),

2 the parties respectfully submit this Stipulation And [Proposed] Order Regarding Fact
3 Discovery.
4

WHEREAS, the Court’s Case Management Order set a cut-off date of June 4, 2015

5 for fact discovery (Dkt. 108);
6

WHEREAS, on October 13, 2015, Aylus filed a motion to strike certain opinions

7 of Apple’s non-infringement expert Dr. Nathaniel Polish regarding a design alternative
8 identified by Dr. Polish;
9

WHEREAS, on November 2, 2015, Judge Westmore denied Aylus’ motion but

10 ruled that Aylus is entitled to conduct a 4-hour deposition of Apple engineer Colin
11 Meldrum regarding the design alternative identified by Dr. Polish (Dkt. 201 at 6);
12

WHEREAS, Judge Westmore further ruled that “[t]he parties shall prepare a

13 stipulation to the presiding judge seeking leave to conduct” Mr. Meldrum’s deposition
14 (id.);
15

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed that Mr. Meldrum’s deposition should take

16 place at 10 a.m. on December 4, 2015 at the Redwood Shores office of Aylus’ counsel
17 Quinn Emanuel;
18

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that the Court issue an order

19 extending the fact discovery cut-off to allow a 4-hour deposition of Mr. Meldrum at 10
20 a.m. on December 4, 2015, at Quinn Emanuel’s Redwood Shores office.
21

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
05010-00001/7380814.1

-2STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING FACT DISCOVERY

Respectfully submitted,

1
2

Dated: December 2, 2015

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP

3
4

By: /s/ Amar L. Thakur
AMAR L. THAKUR
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Aylus Networks, Inc

5
6
7
8 Dated: December 2, 2015

DLA PIPER LLP (US)

9
10

By: /s/ Erik R. Fuehrer
MARK D. FOWLER
CHRISTINE K. CORBETT
ROBERT BUERGI
ROBERT WILLIAMS
ERIK R. FUEHRER
JONATHAN HICKS
Attorneys for Defendant
Apple, Inc.

11
12
13
14
15
16

[PROPOSED] ORDER

17

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

18

Defendant Apple Inc. shall present Colin Meldrum for deposition at 10 a.m. on

19 December 4, 2015, at the Redwood Shores office of Aylus’ counsel Quinn Emanuel. Said
20 deposition shall last no more than 4 hours on the record and shall be limited to questioning

ER

R NIA

FO

Ju

H

28
05010-00001/7380814.1

RT

27

NO

26

LI

12/3/15

25 Dated: ____________________

DERED
SO OR
IT IS
____________________________
Hon. Edward M. Chen en
Ch
ard M.
United States District Court Judge
dge Edw
A

24

UNIT
ED

S

RT
U
O

21 and testimony regarding the design alternative identified in the non-infringement report of
S DISTRICT
22 Apple’s expert Dr. Nathaniel Polish.
TE
C
TA
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.

C
F
D I S T I C T O FACT DISCOVERY
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING
R
-3-

N

1
2
3
4
5
6

ATTESTATION CLAUSE
I, Joseph B. Martin, am the ECF User whose identification and password are being
to file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order. Concurrence to the filing of this document
was obtained from Erik R. Fuehrer, counsel for Apple Inc., on December 2, 2015.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the
foregoing is true and correct.

7 Dated: December 2, 2015
8

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP

9
10
11

By: /s/ Joseph B. Martin
Joseph B. Martin
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Aylus Networks, Inc.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
05010-00001/7380814.1

-4STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING FACT DISCOVERY