Rearden LLC et al v. The Walt Disney Company et al

Filing 39

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 33 JOINT STIPULATION WITH [PROPOSED] Regarding Defendants' Motions to Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6) or, alternatively, to Stay filed by Marvel Studios LLC, Mandeville Films Inc., Walt Disney Motion Pictures Group Inc., The Walt Disney Company, Buena Vista Home Entertainment Inc. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on September 15, 2017. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2017)

1 STEVE W. BERMAN (pro hac vice pending)
[e-mail]
2 MARK S. CARLSON (pro hac vice pending)
[e-mail]
3 HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300
4 Seattle, Washington 98101
Telephone: [phone]
5 Facsimile:
[phone]
6
7 RIO S. PIERCE (SBN 298297)
[e-mail]
8 HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202
9 Berkeley, California 94710
Telephone: [phone]
[phone]
10 Facsimile:

KELLY M. KLAUS (SBN 161091)
[e-mail]
ROHIT K. SINGLA (SBN 213057)
[e-mail]
ELIA HERRERA (SBN 293278)
[e-mail]
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
560 Mission Street, 27th Floor
San Francisco, California 94105-2907
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

11 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

GLENN D. POMERANTZ (SBN 112503)
[e-mail]
JOHN L. SCHWAB (SBN 301386)
[e-mail]
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
350 South Grand Avenue. 50th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071-3426
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

12

Attorneys for Defendants

13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

17 REARDEN LLC and REARDEN MOVA
LLC,
18
Plaintiffs,
19
vs.
20
THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY, WALT
21 DISNEY MOTION PICTURES GROUP,
INC., BUENA VISTA HOME
22 ENTERTAINMENT, INC., MARVEL
STUDIOS, LLC, and MANDEVILLE FILMS,
23 INC.,
24

Case No. 3:17-cv-04006-JST
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’
MOTIONS TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO
FRCP 12(b)(6) OR, ALTERNATIVELY,
TO STAY
Judge:

Hon. Jon S. Tigar

Defendants.

25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04006- JST

Case 3:17-cv-04006-JST Document 33 Filed 09/14/17 Page 2 of 6

1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

2

Plaintiffs Rearden LLC and Rearden MOVA LLC (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants The Walt

3 Disney Company, Walt Disney Motion Pictures Group Inc., Buena Vista Home Entertainment
4 Inc., Marvel Studios LLC, and Mandeville Films Inc. (“Defendants”), by and through their
5 counsel of record, stipulate as follows:
6

WHEREAS, on July 17, 2017, Plaintiffs filed their complaint against Defendants (Dkt. 1)

7 and Defendants were all served by July 31, 2017;
8

WHEREAS, by joint stipulation, the parties agreed that Defendants’ deadline to answer or

9 otherwise respond to the complaint would be extended to and including September 15, 2017 (Dkt.
10 32);
11

WHEREAS, on July 31, 2017, this Court found that the above-captioned case (Rearden v.

12 Disney) is related to the following cases, which are now pending before this court (Dkt. 19):
13

•

00797-JST (SHST v. Rearden)

14
15

•

•

20
21

Rearden LLC v. Crystal Dynamics, Inc., No. 17-cv-04187-JST (Rearden v. Crystal
Dynamics)

18
19

Rearden LLC v. Paramount Pictures Corp., No. 17-cv-04192-JST (Rearden v.
Paramount)

16
17

Shenzhenshi Haitiecheng Science and Technology v. Rearden LLC, No.15-cv-

•

Rearden LLC v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., No. 17-cv-04191-JST
(Rearden v. Fox)

WHEREAS, the Defendants in Rearden v. Disney, Rearden v. Fox, and Rearden v.

22 Paramount all intend to file motions to dismiss the complaints pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
23 12(b)(6), or, alternatively, to stay proceedings in those cases in the event the Court certifies the
24 requested entry of judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) in SHST v. Rearden and also grants
25 Virtual Global Holdings Limited’s forthcoming motion to stay proceedings in that case pending
26 the disposition of an immediate appeal pursuant to Rule 54(b);
27
28
-1-

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04006- JST

Case 3:17-cv-04006-JST Document 33 Filed 09/14/17 Page 3 of 6

1

WHEREAS, the Defendants in Rearden v. Disney, Rearden v. Fox, and Rearden v.

2 Paramount are represented by the same counsel and will be making similar arguments in support
3 of their dismissal motions on common issues;
4

WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiffs and for the Defendants in Rearden v. Disney, Rearden

5 v. Fox, and Rearden v. Paramount have met and conferred regarding the most efficient way to file
6 documents related to Defendants’ upcoming motions to dismiss and have agreed upon the
7 following procedure:
8

•

9

file the same consolidated Motion to Dismiss or Stay and supporting papers in all
three cases;

10
11

•

•

Defendants will file the same consolidated Reply and supporting papers in all three
cases; and

14
15

Plaintiffs will file the same consolidated Opposition and supporting papers in all
three cases;

12
13

Defendants in Rearden v. Disney, Rearden v. Fox, and Rearden v. Paramount will

•

Defendants’ consolidated Motion to Dismiss or Stay will be within the applicable

16

page and other limitations of this Court’s Local Rules. Plaintiffs and Defendants

17

presently intend for their consolidated Opposition and Reply papers, respectively,

18

to be within the same limitations. This stipulation does not preclude either side

19

from seeking an extension of those limitations, either by stipulation or Order based

20

on good cause.

21

WHEREAS, the purpose of the foregoing procedure is to ensure that the Court and

22 opposing counsel will need to review only one set of briefing papers in dealing with these Motions
23 while preserving the record of each set of filings concerning the Motions in each of the respective
24 case dockets;
25

WHEREAS, the parties further agree that if Defendants file their Rule 12(b)(6) motions

26 on September 15, 2017, Plaintiffs’ responsive brief and supporting materials will be due on
27 October 16, 2017, Defendants’ reply brief and supporting materials will be due on November 2,
28 2017; and Defendants will notice the Motions for hearing on November 16, 2017, at 2:00 p.m.;
-2-

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04006- JST

Case 3:17-cv-04006-JST Document 33 Filed 09/14/17 Page 4 of 6

1

WHEREAS, the parties will confer with one another and the Courtroom Deputy regarding

2 a procedure to propose to the Court in the Joint Case Management Statement regarding the
3 coordination of all of the related cases so that parties may file documents in only one master
4 docket;
5

WHEREAS, the Defendants in Rearden v. Crystal Dynamics are not represented by

6 counsel for the Defendants in Rearden v. Disney, Rearden v. Fox, and Rearden v. Paramount, and
7 therefore any motion directed to the pleading that Defendants in Rearden v. Crystal Dynamics will
8 not present the need for a single consolidated brief; nevertheless, to ensure a coordinated briefing
9 schedule and the need for the Court to consider and hear all motions directed to the pleadings at
10 the same time, Plaintiffs will agree that briefing on any motion filed by the parties to Rearden v.
11 Crystal Dynamics shall take place according to the same time and page-limit schedule set forth
12 above;
13

NOW THEREFORE, for good cause, the parties in the Rearden v. Disney, Rearden v.

14 Fox, and Rearden v. Paramount cases stipulate that the documents relevant to Defendants’
15 motions to dismiss the complaints and Plaintiffs’ responsive brief in these cases will be filed
16 pursuant to the procedure and deadlines set forth above.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04006- JST

Case 3:17-cv-04006-JST Document 33 Filed 09/14/17 Page 5 of 6

1 IT IS SO STIPULATED.
2 DATED: September 14, 2017

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO

3
4
By:

5

/s/ Mark S. Carlson
MARK S. CARLSON

6
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

7
8 DATED: September 14, 2017

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

9
10
11

By: /s/ Kelly M. Klaus
KELLY M. KLAUS

12
13

Attorneys for Defendants

14
15
16

CIVIL LOCAL RULE 5-1 ATTESTATION
I, Kelly M. Klaus, am the ECF user whose credentials were utilized in the electronic filing

17 of this document. In accordance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that Mark S.
18 Carlson concurred in the filing of this document.
19
/s/
Kelly M. Klaus
Kelly M. Klaus

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04006- JST

Case 3:17-cv-04006-JST Document 33 Filed 09/14/17 Page 6 of 6

1 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
2
September 15
DATED: _______________, 2017
3
4
5

The Honorable Jon S. Tigar

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-5-

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04006- JST