Chrimar Systems, Inc. et al v. NETGEAR

Filing 65

ORDER, Motions terminated: Initial Case Management Conference set for 5/13/2016 02:30 PM in Courtroom 1, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Susan Illston on 4/13/16. (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/14/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Bruce J. Zabarauskas, SBN. 248601 THOMPSON & KNIGHT LLP 707 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 4100 Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: (310) 203-6902 Facsimile: (310) 203-6980 Email: Justin S. Cohen (pro hac vice) Richard L. Wynne, Jr. (pro hac vice) THOMPSON & KNIGHT LLP 1722 Routh Street, Suite 1500 Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone: (214)969-1700 Facsimile: (214)969-1751 Email: Email: Attorneys for Plaintiffs 10 11 Richard L. Seabolt (SBN 67469) DUANE MORRIS LLP One Market Plaza, Suite 2200 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: 415.957.3212 Facsimile: 415.354.3317 L. Norwood Jameson (admitted pro hac vice) Matthew S. Yungwirth (admitted pro hac vice) S. Neil Anderson (admitted pro hac vice) DUANE MORRIS LLP 1075 Peachtree Street, Suite 2000 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 Telephone: 404.253.6900 Facsimile: 404.253.6901 Arvind Jairam (admitted pro hac vice) DUANE MORRIS LLP 505 9th Street, N.W., Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20004 Telephone: 202.776.5252 Facsimile: 202.403.3665 12 E-Mail: E-Mail: E-Mail: E-Mail: E-Mail: 13 14 15 Attorneys for Defendant NETGEAR, Inc. 16 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 18 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 19 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 20 21 CHRIMAR SYSTEMS, INC., et al., Case No. 3:16-cv-00624-SI Plaintiffs, 22 23 24 25 vs. STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE NETGEAR, INC., Defendant. 26 27 In accordance with Civil Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiffs Chrimar Systems, Inc. and 28 -1STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CMC CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00624-SI 1 Chrimar Holding Company (collectively, “Chrimar”) and Defendant NETGEAR, Inc. 2 (“NETGEAR”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 3 On July 1, 2015, Chrimar filed suit against various defendants in the Eastern District of 4 Texas alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,155,012, 8,942,107, 8,902,760, and 9,019,838 5 (collectively, the “Patents-in-Suit”). 6 Four of the cases have been transferred to the Northern District of California, and are 7 presently before this Court: Chrimar Systems, Inc. et al. v. Juniper Networks, Inc., Case No. 3:16- 8 cv-00558-SI (N.D. Cal.); Chrimar Systems, Inc. et al. v. Ruckus Wireless, Inc., Case No. 3:16-cv- 9 186-SI (N.D. Cal.); Chrimar Systems, Inc. et al. v. NETGEAR, Inc., Case No. 3:16-cv-624-SI 10 (N.D. Cal.); Chrimar Systems, Inc. et al. v. Fortinet, Inc., Case No. 3:16-cv-00897-SI (N.D. Cal.) 11 (collectively, the “N.D. Cal. Chrimar Cases”). 12 On March 24, 2016, the Court entered STIPULATION AND ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CASE 13 MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE [Dkt. No. 60], setting the Case Management Conference (“CMC”) 14 for the four transferred cases to April 22, 2016. 15 Chrimar’s lead counsel has developed a conflict with the April 22, 2016 CMC setting. In 16 particular, in related litigation currently pending in the Eastern District of Texas, Chrimar is 17 subject to an April 25, 2016, deadline for the close of fact discovery. At the time it submitted the 18 previous stipulation setting the CMC for April 22, Chrimar believed that the depositions in the 19 Texas case could be scheduled so as to not interfere with the CMC. Since that time, however, 20 Chrimar has learned that because of witness availability issues, two depositions in the Texas case 21 must proceed on April 22 in Dallas, Texas. Because of those depositions, Chrimar’s lead counsel, 22 Justin Cohen, and associate counsel, Richard Wynne, are unavailable to attend the CMC on that 23 date. 24 While mindful of this Court’s scheduling, rather that requesting leave to proceed with the 25 CMC without the presence of lead counsel, Chrimar contacted the Defendants in each of the N.D. 26 Cal. Chrimar Cases to inquire about rescheduling the CMC. Counsel for the parties in all of the 27 N.D. Cal. Chrimar Cases have conferred and are agreeable to continuing the CMC until a date 28 when Chrimar’s lead counsel is available. -2STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CMC CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00624-SI 1 Having discussed the matter, the parties in all N.D. Cal. Chrimar Cases are available for a 2 CMC on May 13, 2016. Accordingly, if the Court’s schedule permits, counsel for the parties in 3 this action have agreed to reschedule the CMC currently set for April 22, 2016, to May 13, 2016, 4 at 2:30 p.m. 5 Because the Court has not entered a Scheduling Order in any of the four N.D. Cal. 6 Chrimar Cases, the requested time modification will have no effect on the schedule for this or any 7 of the cases. 8 IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND STIPULATED, that the CMC in this case shall be 9 rescheduled to May 13, 2016, at 2:30 p.m. and the related deadlines for filing a joint CMC 10 statement is adjusted to May 6, 2016. Further, the parties shall file either a Stipulation to ADR 11 Process or Notice of Need for ADR Phone Conference not later than April 22, 2016. 12 Respectfully submitted, Respectfully submitted, 15 /s/ Richard L. Wynne, Jr. Richard L. Wynne, Jr. Thompson & Knight LLP /s/ Matthew S. Yungwirth w/perm. R. Wynne Matthew S. Yungwirth Duane Morris LLP 16 Counsel for Plaintiffs Counsel for Defendant NETGEAR, Inc. 13 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CMC CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00624-SI 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 Case No. 3:16-cv-00624-SI 3 4 5 6 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is 707 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 4100, Los Angeles, CA 90017. On April 12, 2016 I served documents described as follows: Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Reschedule Case Management Conference 7 8 9 10 11 I served the document listed above on the interested parties below, using the following means: [X] (By Court’s CM/ECF System) Pursuant to Local Rule, I electronically filed the documents with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which sent notification of that filing to the persons listed on the CM/ECF service list. 12 13 14 I declare under penalty of perjury under 28 U.S.C. § 1746 that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on April 12, 2016, at Los Angeles, California 15 16 17 /s/ Bruce J. Zabarauskas Bruce J. Zabarauskas 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -4STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CMC CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00624-SI 1 2 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 4 5 4/13 Dated: __________, 2016 THE HONORABLE SUSAN ILLSTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -5STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CMC CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00624-SI

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?