ArcSoft, Inc. v. CyberLink Corp. et al

Filing 26

ORDER granting 21 STIPULATION TO CHANGE TIME OF BRIEFING SCHEDULE, HEARING ON ARCSOFT'S PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION MOTION, AND DATE FOR DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT, AND RE: DEFENDANT'S ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF PROCESS. Reset D eadlines as to 10 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction. Response due by 11/10/2015. Reply due by 11/24/2015. Motion Hearing set for 12/9/2015 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William H. Orrick. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 09/15/2015. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/15/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

HAROLD H. DAVIS, JR. (SBN 235552)
[e-mail]
K&L GATES LLP
Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200
San Francisco, California 94111
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Attorneys for Defendants CYBERLINK CORP.,
PERFECT CORP. (CALIFORNIA), PERFECT
CORP. (CAYMAN ISLANDS)

12

Otto O. Lee, CA Bar No. 173987
[e-mail]
Kevin Viau, CA Bar No. 275556
[e-mail]
Bonnie J. Wolf, CA Bar No. 284872
[e-mail]
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP LLP
12 South First Street, 12th Floor
San Jose, California 95113
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

13

Attorneys for Plaintiff ARCSOFT INC.

8
9
10
11

14
15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17

SAN JOSE DIVISION

18

ARCSOFT INC.,

19

Case No.

Plaintiff,

20

v.

21

CYBERLINK CORP., a Taiwan, R.O.C.
corporation, PERFECT CORP., a California
corporation, and PERFECT CORP., a Cayman
Islands corporation,

22
23
24

WHO
5:15-cv-03707-PSG

STIPULATION TO CHANGE TIME OF
BRIEFING SCHEDULE, HEARING ON
ARCSOFT’S PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION MOTION, AND DATE FOR
DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO
COMPLAINT, AND RE: DEFENDANTS’
ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF
PROCESS; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Defendants.

25
26
27
28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO.: 5:15-CV-03707-PSG

1
2
3

STIPULATION
Per L. R. 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiff Arcsoft Inc. (“Arcsoft”) and defendants Cyberlink Corp.,
Perfect Corp. (California), and Perfect Corp. (Cayman Islands) (collectively “Defendants” and,

4
5
6

together with Arcsoft, the “Parties”) hereby stipulate and agree, subject to the approval of the Court,
and jointly submit this Stipulation as follows:

7

1.

Arcsoft filed its Complaint against Defendants on August 13, 2015.

8

2.

Arcsoft filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Dkt. # 10-16] and supporting

9
10

materials on September 1, 2015.
3.

Arcsoft served the Summons, Complaint and the moving papers filed in support of

11
Arcsoft’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (collectively, “Plaintiff’s Pleadings”) on Defendant
12
13

Perfect Corp. (California) on September 2, 2015. Arcsoft has not yet served the foreign based

14

defendants, Cyberlink Corp. or Perfect Corp. (Cayman Islands) (collectively, the “Foreign

15

Defendants”).

16
17
18

4.

Acting by and through their authorized counsel-of-record herein as captioned above,

Defendants have agreed to accept service of Plaintiff’s Pleadings in exchange for moving certain
deadlines.

19
5.

In exchange for Defendants accepting service as stated above, the Parties have

20
21

mutually agreed that (a) the deadline for Defendants to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the

22

Complaint under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure would be November 10, 2015, and (b) the

23

deadline for Defendants to file their opposition to Arcsoft’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction shall

24

be moved from September 15, 2015 to November 10, 2015.

25
26

6.

In the interest of judicial economy, Defendants also stipulate not to file any motion to

dismiss the Complaint before November 10, 2015 nor one with a hearing before December 8, 2015 or

27
28
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO.: 5:15-CV-03707-PSG

1
2
3

any later hearing on Arcsoft’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Defendants further stipulate and
agree that they shall be subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court in this action.
7.

The Parties further stipulate that the deadline for Arcsoft to file its reply brief in

4
5
6
7

support of its motion for Preliminary Injunction shall be moved from September 22, 2015 to
November 24, 2015.
8.

The Parties also agree and request of the Court that, in light of the above-stipulated

8

extensions on the briefing schedule, the hearing on Arcsoft’s motion for preliminary injunction be

9

rescheduled from October 6, 2015 to December 8, 2015 or thereafter as appropriate with the Court’s

10

calendar.

11
9.

The Parties submit that the above-referenced extensions will allow sufficient time for

12
13

the Defendants to adequately respond to the Complaint and the Motion for Preliminary Injunction, in

14

light of the foreign residence of two defendants, the fact that Defendants’ counsel will be out of the

15

country during the currently scheduled hearing date on the motion for preliminary injunction, and due

16

to the allegations and issues presented by Arcsoft’s filings.

17
18

10.

None of the Parties have previously requested any change to any deadline in this case.

11.

This request affects only the hearing date for the preliminary injunction and the

19
briefing schedule on that motion. It does not affect any other dates currently scheduled by the Court.
20
21
22

Now, therefore, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the
Court, that:

23
a.

Defendants have agreed to accept service of Plaintiff’s Pleadings through their

24
authorized counsel-of-record as listed above.
25
26
27

b.

Defendants have agreed not to file any motion to dismiss the Complaint before
November 10, 2015 nor one with a hearing before December 8, 2015 or any later

28
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO.: 5:15-CV-03707-PSG

1

hearing on Arcsoft’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Defendants have agreed that

2

they shall be subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court in this action.

3

c.

4

Defendants’ time to answer, move, or otherwise respond to Arcsoft’s Complaint and
Motion for a Preliminary Injunction is moved to on or before November 10, 2015.

5
d.

6

is moved to on or before November 24, 2015.

7
e.

8

The hearing on Arcsoft’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, if any, will occur on or
after December 8, 2015.

9
10

Arcsoft’s time to file a reply brief in support of its Motion for a Preliminary Injunction

///

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO.: 5:15-CV-03707-PSG

1
2

IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED.
Dated: September 11, 2015

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Harold H. Davis
Harold H. Davis
[e-mail]
K&L GATES LLP
4 Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

11

/s/ Otto O. Lee
Otto O. Lee
[e-mail]
Kevin Viau
[e-mail]
Bonnie J. Wolf
[e-mail]
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP LLP
12 South First Street, 12th Floor
San Jose, California 95113
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

12

Attorneys for Arcsoft Inc.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Attorneys for Defendants Cyberlink Corp.,
Perfect Corp. (California), Perfect Corp.
(Cayman Islands)

13
SIGNATURE ATTESTATION
14
15
16
17

I hereby attest pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5.1 that concurrence in the electronic filing of this
document has been obtained from the other signatory.
Dated: September 11, 2015

/s/ Otto O. Lee
Otto O. Lee

18
19

[PROPOSED] ORDER

20
21
22
23
24

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Hearing on Motion to Dismiss is set for December 9, 2015 at 2:00 p.m.
DATED: September 15 2015
___,

_______________________________________
William H. Orrick
The Honorable _____________________
Judge of the U.S. District Court

25
26
27
28
4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO.: 5:15-CV-03707-PSG