Sentegra, LLC v. Asus Computer International
Filing
116
ORDER RE EVIDENTIARY HEARING RECORD. Signed by Judge Alsup on 12/20/2016. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/20/2016)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Li Chen (admitted pro hac)
lchen@chenmalin.com
Dwayne C. Norton (admitted pro hac)
dnorton@chenmalin.com
Michael Fagan (admitted pro hac)
mfagan@chenmalin.com
Chen Malin LLP
1700 Pacific Avenue, Suite 2400
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: (214) 627-9950
Fax: (214) 627-9940
Vinay V. Joshi (Cal. Bar No. 213487)
vjoshi@atwiplaw.com
Amin Turocy & Watson LLP
160 West Santa Clara Street, Suite 975
San Jose, CA 95113
Telephone: (650) 618-6481
Fax: (216) 696-8731
Attorneys for Defendant
ASUS Computer International
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
14
15
16
Sentegra, LLC,
Plaintiff,
17
18
19
20
vs.
ASUS Computer International,
Defendant.
)
) Case Number: 3:16-cv-03136-WHA
)
) [PROPOSED] ORDER
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
___________________________________________________________________________
Case No. 3:16-cv-03136-WHA
1
During the December 14, 2016 evidentiary hearing before this Court, counsel for
2
Defendant ASUS Computer International (“Defendant”) and for Plaintiff Sentegra LLC
3
(“Sentegra”) represented that the parties had agreed to pre-admit Defendant’s Exhibits 1–9 and
4
15–20. Dkt. 111 at 9:10–10:12. Accordingly, those Exhibits became part of the record of this
5
proceeding. The Court hereby modifies the record as follows:
6
Defendant’s Exhibits 17, 18, 19, and 20 are stricken from the record, as they do not exist.
7
Plaintiff’s Exhibits 19 and 20, which were included in Defendant’s exhibit binder at the December
8
14, 2016 evidentiary hearing, remain part of the record.
9
10
11
Date:
December 20, 2016.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
___________________________________________________________________________
Case No. 3:16-cv-03136-WHA
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?