Tessera, Inc. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. et al

Filing 1194

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM THE SPECIAL MASTERS MARCH 19, 2013 ORAL RULING. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 4/12/2013. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/12/2013)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

TESSERA, INC.,
Plaintiff,

5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

No. C 05-4063 CW

v.
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC.;
SPANSION, LLC; SPANSION, INC;
SPANSION TECHNOLOGY, INC.;
ADVANCED SEMICONDUCTOR
ENGINEERING, INC.; ASE (U.S.),
INC.; CHIPMOS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;
CHIPMOS U.S.A., INC.; SILICONWARE
PRECISION INDUSTRIES CO., LTD.;
SILICONWARE USA, INC.;
STMICROELECTRONICS N.V.;
STMICROELECTRONICS, INC.; STATS
CHIPPAC, INC.; STATS CHIPPAC
(BVI), LTD.; and STATS CHIPPAC,
LTD.,

ORDER DENYING
MOTION FOR RELIEF
FROM THE SPECIAL
MASTER’S MARCH 19,
2013 ORAL RULING

Defendants.
________________________________/
AND ALL RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS
/
Defendants Siliconware Precision Industries Co., Ltd. and

18

Siliconware U.S.A., Inc. (collectively, Siliconware Defendants)

19

have submitted a chambers copy of a motion for relief from the

20

Special Master’s March 19, 2013 oral ruling and a motion to seal

21

the motion for relief and most of the supporting documents.

22

the March 19, 2013 oral ruling, the Special Master granted

23

Plaintiff Tessera, Inc.’s motion for a protective order regarding

24

Siliconware’s subpoena to non-party Computer Aided Engineering

25

(CAE).

26

In

Having reviewed the documents provided by Siliconware in its

27

chambers copy, and having considered the matters de novo, the

28

Court DENIES Siliconware’s motion for relief and AFFIRMS the

1

Special Master’s March 19, 2013 oral ruling for the reasons that

2

he stated during the hearing on the record.

3

In addition, the Court notes that Siliconware has not filed

4

either its motion for relief or its motion to seal in the docket

5

of this case but rather has simply submitted a chambers copy of

6

the motions and their supporting papers.1

7

ensure that these motions have been filed properly in the docket

8

of this action within five days of the date of this Order.

9

Siliconware shall

IT IS SO ORDERED.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

Dated: 4/12/2013

12

CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1

27
28

Siliconware has also submitted a chambers copy of a
stipulation with Tessera agreeing that the relevant documents
should be sealed. Thus, it appears that Siliconware has served
Tessera with a copy of its motion for relief.
2