Codexis, Inc. v. EnzymeWorks, Inc. et al

Filing 186

CONSENT JUDGMENT OF PATENT INFRINGEMENT. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 02/06/2018. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2018)

8

DOUGLAS E. LUMISH (Bar No. 183863)
[e-mail]
GABRIEL S. GROSS (Bar No. 254672)
[e-mail]
PATRICIA YOUNG (Bar No. 291265)
[e-mail]
LINFONG TZENG (Bar No. 281798)
[e-mail]
JIE WANG (Bar No. 306395)
[e-mail]
LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
140 Scott Drive
Menlo Park, California 94025
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: +1.650.463.2600

9

Attorneys for Plaintiff CODEXIS, INC.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

13
14
15

CODEXIS, INC.

16

Plaintiff,

17

v.

18
19
20
21
22

CASE NO. 3:16-cv-00826-WHO
CONSENT JUDGMENT OF PATENT
INFRINGEMENT

ENZYMEWORKS, INC., a California
corporation, ENZYMEWORKS, INC., a
Chinese corporation a/k/a SUZHOU
HANMEI BIOTECHNOLOGY CO. LTD
d/b/a ENZYMEWORKS, INC. (CHINA),
JUNHUA TAO, an individual, and
ANDREW TAO, an individual
Defendants.

23
24
25

The parties having agreed to a settlement of the claims between them, and having

26

stipulated to entry of this Consent Judgment, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND

27

DECREED that:

28
AT T O R N EYS AT LAW
SIL IC O N VALL EY

CONSENT JUDGMENT
CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00826-WHO

1

1.

This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the above-captioned action

2

and personal jurisdiction over the parties, and venue is proper in this District. This Court retains

3

jurisdiction for the purpose of executing and enforcing the terms of this Consent Judgment.

4

2.

Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff Codexis, Inc. (“Codexis”) against

5

Defendants EnzymeWorks, Inc. (U.S.) and Suzhou Hanmei Biotechnology Co. Ltd, d/b/a

6

EnzymeWorks, Inc. (China) (collectively, “EnzymeWorks”) (collectively, the “Corporate

7

Defendants”) on Counts I through X of the Second Amended Complaint in the above-captioned

8

action as follows:

9

a.

EnzymeWorks has infringed U.S. Patent Nos. 8,088,610; 8,415,127;

10

7,820,421; 8,071,347; 8,227,229; 8,293,507; 8,470,564; 8,852,900; 8,932,838; and

11

9,133,445 (the “Patent-in-Suit”).

12

b.

The Patents-in-Suit are not invalid.

13

3.

This Consent Judgment is final, enforceable, and non-appealable.

14

4.

Each party will bear its own fees, costs, and expenses.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28
AT T O R N EYS AT LAW
SIL IC O N VALL EY

CONSENT JUDGMENT
CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00826-WHO

1

Dated: February 5, 2018

Respectfully submitted,

2
LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

3
By

4

Douglas E. Lumish
Gabriel S. Gross
Patricia Young
Linfong Tzeng
Jie Wang

5
6
7

Attorneys for Plaintiff CODEXIS, INC.

8
9

/s/ Gabriel S. Gross

Dated: February 5, 2018

Respectfully submitted,

10
By
11

/s/ J. James Li
J. James Li
Tony Abdollahi
Andy Pierz

12
13

Attorneys for Defendants JUNHUA TAO,
ANDREW TAO, ENZYMEWORKS, INC.,
and ENZYMEWORKS, INC. (CHINA) a/k/a
SUZHOU HANMEI BIOTECHNOLOGY CO.
LTD dba ENZYMEWORKS, INC. (CHINA)

14
15
16
17
18
19

ATTESTATION
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that the concurrence in the filing of
this document has been obtained from the other signatory.

20
21

Dated: February 5, 2018

22

By

23

/s/ Gabriel S. Gross
Gabriel S. Gross

24
ORDER

25
26
27
28
AT T O R N EYS AT LAW
SIL IC O N VALL EY

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 6, 2018
THE HONORABLE WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Court Judge
CONSENT JUDGMENT
CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00826-WHO