Priceplay.com Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 60

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Susan Illston on 5/1/15. (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/5/2015)

DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
HARRINGTON, FOXX, DUBROW & CANTER,
1 LLP
2 GREGORY J. SOWDER (196158)
Montgomery Street, Suite 1100
3 San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone [phone]
4 Facsimile [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
5
6 WESTERMAN, HATTORI, DANIELS &
ADRIAN, LLP
7 SCOTT M. DANIELS
1250 Connecticut Avenue N.W., Suite 700
8 Washington, D.C. 20036-2657
Telephone [phone]
9
Facsimile [phone]
10 Email: [e-mail]

ROBERT B. WILSON
[e-mail]
51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
New York, NY 10010-1601
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

11 Attorneys for Plaintiff
PRICEPLAY.COM, INC.
12

Attorneys for Defendant
GOOGLE INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14
15
16

Case No. 3:14-cv-04828-SI
PRICEPLAY.COM, INC.,
Plaintiff,

17
18

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
DAVID A. PERLSON (209502)
[e-mail]
MICHELLE A. CLARK (243777)
[e-mail]
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-4788
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order of Dismissal
re U.S. Patent Nos. 8,050,982 and 8,494,917

v.

19 GOOGLE, INC.,

Defendant.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
01980.00029/6675803.1

1

Stipulation and [Proposed]
Order of Dismissal
Case No. 3:14-cv-04828-SI

1

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Priceplay.com, Inc. (“Priceplay”) filed an Amended Complaint on

2 June 27, 2014 (ECF No. 10) alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,050,982, (“’982 Patent”)
3 and U.S. Patent No. 8,494,917 (“’917 Patent”) (together “Patents-in-Suit”);
4

WHEREAS, Defendant Google Inc. (“Google”) filed its Answer to the Amended Complaint

5 on July 29, 2014 (ECF No. 24) asserting, inter alia, an affirmative defense that the Patents-in-Suit
6 are invalid;
7

WHEREAS, on March 18, 2015, following briefing and oral argument, the Honorable

8 Richard G. Andrews of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware in Priceplay.com Inc. v.
9 AOL Advertising, Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-00092-RGA (“AOL Action”) (ECF Nos. 49 & 50) issued
10 an order finding all claims of the ’982 patent and the ’917 patent invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as
11 being directed toward patent-ineligible subject matter;
12

WHEREAS, Priceplay has filed a Notice of Appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

13 Federal Circuit (ECF No. 52 in the AOL Action);
14

WHEREAS, in the interests of judicial economy and efficiency, and to avoid the need for

15 multiple courts to decide overlapping legal and factual issues, the parties to the present action seek
16 to enter a stipulated order of dismissal and final judgment regarding all claims asserted by PricePlay
17 in accordance with Judge Andrews’s order such that the present case and the AOL Action may be
18 heard by the Federal Circuit at the same time;
19

NOW, THEREFORE, Priceplay and Google, by and through their respective counsel of

20 record, hereby stipulate and respectfully request that the Court order the following:
21

1.

The Court hereby adopts Judge Andrews’s order of March 18, 2015 granting AOL’s

22 Motion to Dismiss in Priceplay.com Inc. v. AOL Advertising, Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-00092-RGA,
23 for purposes of entering a final and appealable dismissal and judgment. Based on Judge Andrews’s
24 order, all claims of the ’982 and ’917 patents are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. All briefing and
25 arguments relating to AOL’s Motion to Dismiss in the AOL Action shall be deemed to be part of the
26 record in the present action.
27
28
01980.00029/6675803.1

2

Stipulation and [Proposed]
Order of Dismissal
3:14-cv-04830-SI

1

2.

Nothing in this stipulated dismissal order shall be construed as an admission by

2 Priceplay as to the correctness of Judge Andrews’s order in the AOL Action, or diminishing
3 Priceplay’s rights of appeal.
4

3.

All claims by Priceplay against Google in this action are dismissed.

5

4.

This order shall constitute a final and appealable order.

6

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

7
8

Dated: April 30, 2015

HARRINGTON, FOXX, DUBROW &
CANTER, LLP

9
/s/
Gregory J. Sower
Attorneys for Plaintiff
PRICEPLAY.COM, INC.

10
11
12

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN LLP

13
14

/s/
Michelle A. Clark
Attorneys for Defendant
Google INC.

15
16
17
18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
5/1/15
21 Dated:________________________

________________________

22

United States District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
01980.00029/6675803.1

3

Stipulation and [Proposed]
Order of Dismissal
3:14-cv-04830-SI