Google, Inc. v. Eolas Technologies Inc. et al

Filing 82

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 79 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Extending Time for Google Inc. to Respond to Defendants' Second Motion to Dismiss and to Defendants' Counterclaims, and Continuing the Initial Case Management Conference filed by Google, Inc. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on July 21, 2014. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/21/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6

JONATHAN K. WALDROP (SBN: 297903)
[e-mail]
DARCY L. JONES (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
ROBERT P. WATKINS III (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP
333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 200
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

7
8
9
10

JEFFREY J. TONEY (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP
1349 West Peachtree Street, N.W., Suite 1500
Atlanta, GA 30309
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

11
12

Attorneys for Plaintiff
GOOGLE INC.

13

COURTLAND L. REICHMAN (SBN: 268873)
[e-mail]
MCKOOL SMITH HENNIGAN, P.C.
255 Shoreline Drive, Suite 510
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
KEVIN L. BURGESS (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
JOHN B. CAMPBELL (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
J.R. JOHNSON, II (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
JENNIFER A. ALBERT (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
JOSHUA W. BUDWIN (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
300 W. 6th Street, Suite 1700
Austin, Texas 78701
Telephone: [phone];
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES
INCORPORATED; and THE REGENTS OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

14
15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
18
19
GOOGLE INC.,

Case No. 13-CV-05997-JST

20
Plaintiff,
21
v.
22
23

EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; and
THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA,

24

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR
GOOGLE INC. TO RESPOND TO
DEFENDANTS’ SECOND MOTION TO
DISMISS AND TO DEFENDANTS’
COUNTERCLAIMS, AND CONTINUING
THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE

Defendants.
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER

CASE NO. 13-CV-05997-JST

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2, 16-2, and 7-12, Plaintiff Google Inc. (“Google”) and

2

Defendants Eolas Technologies Incorporated and The Regents of the University of California

3

(collectively, “Defendants”) hereby stipulate through their respective counsel of record as

4

follows:

5
6

WHEREAS, on January 2, 2014 and January 3, 2014, Google served its complaint upon
Defendants;

7
8

WHEREAS, on January 10, 2014, the Court set an Initial Case Management Conference
for April 9, 2014;

9

WHEREAS, on January 22, 2014, at the request of Defendants, the parties agreed to

10

mutual 14 day extensions for Defendants to respond to Google’s complaint and for Google to

11

respond to Defendants’ pleadings or response to Google’s complaint to which a response is

12

allowed;

13
14

WHEREAS, on January 24, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation to extend the deadline for
Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to Google’s complaint to February 7, 2014;

15
16

WHEREAS, on January 24, 2014, this Court granted the parties’ January 24, 2014
stipulation;

17
18

WHEREAS, on February 7, 2014, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of
jurisdiction in response to Google’s complaint;

19

WHEREAS, on February 17, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation to extend the deadline for

20

Google to respond to Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction until March 7, 2014,

21

to extend the deadline for Defendants to reply to Google’s opposition until March 14, 2014, and

22

to extend the hearing for Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction until April 3,

23

2014;

24
25

WHEREAS, on February 19, 2014, this Court granted the parties’ February 17, 2014
stipulation;

26

WHEREAS, on March 13, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation to extend the deadline for

27

Defendants to reply to Google’s opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of

28

jurisdiction until March 17, 2014;
JOINT STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER

-1-

CASE NO. 13-CV-05997-JST

1
2

WHEREAS, on March 13, 2014, this Court granted the parties’ March 13, 2014
stipulation;

3

WHEREAS, on March 25, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation to continue the Initial Case

4

Management Conference to allow for the Court to rule on Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack

5

of jurisdiction;

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

WHEREAS, on March 28, 2014, this Court granted the parties’ March 25, 2014
stipulation;
WHEREAS, on April 18, 2014, the Court continued the Initial Case Management
Conference until August 20, 2014;
WHEREAS, on July 8, 2014, Defendants’ filed their answer and counterclaims to Google
Inc.’s complaint, and filed a motion to dismiss counterclaims;
WHEREAS, Google Inc.’s response to Defendants’ motion to dismiss is currently due
July 22, 2014;
WHEREAS, Defendants’ reply to Google’s response to Defendants’ motion to dismiss is
currently due July 29, 2014;
WHEREAS, Google Inc.’s response to Defendants’ counterclaims is currently due
August 1, 2014;
NOW THEREFORE the parties through their undersigned counsel hereby stipulate and
request that the Court grant, pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2 that:


21
22

until August 19, 2014;


23
24

27

The time to file the Defendants’ reply to Google’s opposition be extended until
September 9, 2014;



25
26

The time to file Google’s opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss be extended

The hearing for the Defendant’s motion to dismiss be noticed for October 9, 2014,
or as soon thereafter at the Court’s convenience;



The time for Google to respond to Defendants’ counterclaims be extended until
October 24, 2014; and

28
10009298v1
7/17/2014 11:33 AM

JOINT STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER

-2-

CASE NO. 13-CV-05997-JST

1



The Initial Case Management Conference in this action be continued to

2

Wednesday, December 10, 2014 at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter at the Court’s

3

convenience.

4
5

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: July 17, 2014

KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP

6
By: /s/ Jonathan K. Waldrop___________
JONATHAN K. WALDROP
(SBN: 297903)
[e-mail]
KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP
333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 200
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

7
8
9
10
11

Attorneys for Plaintiff
GOOGLE INC., INC.

12
13

MCKOOL SMITH HENNIGAN, P.C.

14
15

Dated: July 17, 2014
By: /s/ Courtland L. Reichman_____________
COURTLAND LEWIS REICHMAN
(SBN 268873)
[e-mail]
MCKOOL SMITH HENNIGAN PC
255 Shoreline Drive, Suite 510
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

16
17
18
19
20

Attorneys for Defendants
EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED;
and THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA

21
22
23
24
25
26

I hereby attest pursuant to L.R. 5.1(i)(3) that concurrence in the electronic filing of this
document has been obtained from the other signatories.
Dated: July 17, 2014

27

_/s/ Jonathan K. Waldrop___________________
Jonathan K. Waldrop

28
10009298v1
7/17/2014 11:33 AM

JOINT STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER

-3-

CASE NO. 13-CV-05997-JST

1

[PROPOSED] ORDER

2

The Court having considered the stipulation of the parties, orders as follows:

3



4

until August 19, 2014;


6

September 9, 2014;


8

as soon thereafter at the Court’s convenience; and


10

October 24, 2014;


12
13
14
15

The Initial Case Management Conference in this action is continued to
Wednesday, December 10, 2014 at 2:00 p.m.



The parties shall file a Joint Case Management Statement on or before
Wednesday, December 3, 2014.

PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

18

July 21
Dated: ______________, 2014

UNIT
ED

17

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

S

16

ED
ORDER
OS. Tigar
Honorable Jon
IT IS S

R NIA

11

The time for Google to respond to Defendants’ counterclaims is extended until

United States District Judge

19

NO

20

RT

21

n S.
J u d ge J o

H

ER

Ti ga r

22
23

FO

9

The hearing for the Defendant’s motion to dismiss is noticed for October 9, 2014, or

LI

7

The time to file the Defendants’ reply to Google’s opposition is extended until

A

5

The time to file Google’s opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss is extended

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

24
25
26
27
28
10009298v1
7/17/2014 11:33 AM

JOINT STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER

-4-

CASE NO. 13-CV-05997-JST