American Navigation Systems, Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Filing 113

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 112 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER STAYING CASE PENDING INTER PARTES REVIEW PROCEEDINGS filed by Apple Inc. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on March 27, 2015. (wsnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/27/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
Michael D. Jay (SBN 223827)
[e-mail]
Bill Ward (SBN 246472)
[e-mail]
401 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 850
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
William D. Marsillo (Pro Hac Vice to be filed)
[e-mail]
333 Main Street
Armonk, NY 10504
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
APPLE INC.

11
12

[Additional Counsel list on Signature
Page]

13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

17
18

AMERICAN NAVIGATION SYSTEMS,
INC.,

19
Plaintiff,
20
v.

Case No. 3:14-cv-05297-JST
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER STAYING CASE PENDING
INTER PARTES REVIEW
PROCEEDINGS

21
APPLE INC.,
22
Defendant.
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER STAYING CASE PENDING
INTER PARTES REVIEW PROCEEDINGS
NO. 3:14-CV-05297-JST

1
2

Plaintiff American Navigation Systems, Inc. (“AmNav”) and Defendant Apple Inc.
(“Apple”) hereby submit this stipulation and proposed order.

3

WHEREAS, on March 6, 2015, Apple, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung

4

Electronics America, Inc. (collectively “Samsung”), and non-party Google Inc. filed two

5

petitions with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) for administrative inter partes

6

review of asserted U.S. Patent No. 5,902,347 (“’347 Patent”), numbered IPR2015-00849 and

7

IPR2015-00851.

8
9

WHEREAS, “Courts have inherent power to manage their dockets and stay
proceedings, including the authority to order a stay pending conclusion of a PTO

10

reexamination.” Ethicon, Inc. v. Quigg, 849 F.2d 1422, 1426-27 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (internal

11

citations omitted); Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. v. LG Elecs., Inc., No. 14–cv–01012–SI,

12

2015 WL 545534, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 9, 2015).

13

WHEREAS, Apple urges that it is in the interests of the Parties and the Court to stay

14

the above-captioned case pending final resolution of the inter partes review petitions and

15

associated proceedings pertaining to the ’347 Patent.

16
17

WHEREAS, AmNav does not oppose a stay that would last until the PTO decides
whether to institute inter partes review (Dkt. No. 106).

18
19

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between AmNav and Apple,
and subject to the approval of the Court, that:1

20

1.

The entirety of this case shall be stayed pending the decision by the PTO

21

whether to institute inter partes review in response to the two petitions. If the PTO institutes

22

inter partes review, the stay will continue through final resolution in the PTO; in the event

23

that the PTO has not instituted inter partes review within the timeframe set forth by 35 U.S.C.

24

§ 314(b), the stay will expire without further action by the Court. All remaining hearings and

25

deadlines set forth in the Initial Scheduling Order (Dkt. No. 102) are therefore hereby

26
27

1

Samsung and AmNav filed a substantively identical stipulation and proposed order in their
case.

28
-1-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER STAYING CASE PENDING
INTER PARTES REVIEW PROCEEDINGS
NO. 3:14-CV-05297-JST

1
2

vacated.
2.

In the event the PTO (i) denies inter partes review on all petitioned grounds for

3

any claim of the ’347 Patent, or (ii) dismisses an inter partes review proceeding in whole or

4

in part following institution, AmNav intends to file a motion requesting that the Court lift this

5

stay. All briefing and argument pertaining to such a motion shall be conducted according to

6

the Federal Rules, Local Rules, and Standing Orders of this Court.

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER STAYING CASE PENDING
INTER PARTES REVIEW PROCEEDINGS
NO. 3:14-CV-05297-JST

1
2

Dated:

March 26, 2015

Dated:

March 26, 2015

3
By: __/s/ Barry Barnett ______

By: __/s/ Michael D. Jay_____

KALPANA SRINIVASAN (S.B. #237460)
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 950
Los Angeles, California 90067-6029
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 310-789-3150
[e-mail]

BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
Michael D. Jay (SBN 223827)
[e-mail]
Bill Ward (SBN 246472)
[e-mail]
401 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 850
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

BARRY BARNETT (Pro Hac Vice)
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
901 Main Street, Suite 5100
Dallas, Texas 75202
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 214-754-1933
[e-mail]

12
13
14
15
16

MAX L. TRIBBLE, JR. (Pro Hac Vice)
JOSEPH S. GRINSTEIN (Pro Hac Vice)
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100
Houston, Texas 77002
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 713-654-6666
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
William D. Marsillo (Pro Hac Vice to be
filed)
[e-mail]
333 Main Street
Armonk, NY 10504
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
APPLE INC.

17
18
19
20

PATRICK C. BAGEANT (Pro Hac Vice)
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800
Seattle, WA 98101-3000
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 206-516-3883
[e-mail]

21
22

Attorneys for Plaintiff
AMERICAN NAVIGATION SYSTEMS, INC.

23
24
25
26
27
28

-3-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER STAYING CASE PENDING
INTER PARTES REVIEW PROCEEDINGS
NO. 3:14-CV-05297-JST

1
2
3

ATTORNEY ATTESTATION
Pursuant to Civil L.R. 5-1(i)(3), I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in
the filing of this document has been obtained from each of its signatories.

4
5

Dated: March 26, 2015

By: /s/ Michael D. Jay
Michael D. Jay

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-4-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER STAYING CASE PENDING
INTER PARTES REVIEW PROCEEDINGS
NO. 3:14-CV-05297-JST

1

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

2

The above Stipulation Staying Case Pending Inter Partes Review Proceedings is

ER

11

R NIA
FO

. Ti ga r

LI

nS
J u d ge J o

H

10

RT

9

I

Honorable Jon S. Tigar
United States District Judge

NO

8

ERED

ORD
T IS SO

A

7

Dated: March 27, 2015

RT
U
O

5
6

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

IT IS SO ORDERED.

S

4

Approved, and all parties shall comply with its Provisions.

UNIT
ED

3

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-5-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER STAYING CASE PENDING
INTER PARTES REVIEW PROCEEDINGS
NO. 3:14-CV-05297-JST