Genmark Automation, Inc. v. Innovative Robotics Systems, Inc.

Filing 126

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE re 125 Stipulation filed by Innovative Robotics Systems, Inc. Joint Case Management Statement due by 11/24/2010. Case Management Conference set for 12/2/2010 02:00 PM. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 10/19/10. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/19/2010)

Download PDF
Genmark Automation, Inc. v. Innovative Robotics Systems, Inc. Doc. 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 McPHARLIN SPRINKLES & THOMAS LLP Robert E. Camors, Jr., CA Bar No. 121204 BOBCAMORS@MSTPARTNERS.COM 160 W. Santa Clara St., Suite 400 San Jose, CA 95113 Telephone: 408.293.1900 Facsimile: 408.293.1999 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant GENMARK AUTOMATION, INC. WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI JAMES C. YOON, CA Bar No. 177155 JYOON@WSGR.COM 650 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 Telephone: (650) 493-9300 Facsimile: (650) 493-6811 Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant INNOVATIVE ROBOTICS SYSTEMS, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION GENMARK AUTOMATION, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, Counterdefendant, v. CASE NO. 05-cv-04707 PJH STIPULATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE FOR 30 DAYS INNOVATIVE ROBOTICS SYSTEMS, INC., Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12 a California corporation, Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton Defendant, Counterclaimant. Plaintiff, Genmark Automation, Inc. ("Genmark") and Defendant, Innovative Robotics Systems, Inc., ("IRSI") (Genmark and IRSI are collectively "the Parties") hereby stipulate and agree to seek an order continuing the Case Management Conference which has been set by the Court to occur on October 21, 2010 by the Court's Order dated September 9, 2010 (Docket Item No. 124). The facts supporting this Stipulation are in the Declaration of James C. Yoon filed herewith and which is Exhibit A hereto ("Yoon Decl."). STIPULATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE FOR 30 DAYS CASE NO. 05-CV-04707 PJH Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff and Defendant request the continuation of this case management conference in order to have additional time to pursue settlement discussions and to prepare settlement documentation. See Yoon Decl. ¶ 3. Settlement work has progressed since the filing of the last stipulated request for an order continuing the case management conference on September 8, 2010. The Parties have met and conferred regarding the settlement documents drafted by Genmark. IRSI's counsel provided Genmark with proposed changes to the settlement documents on September 15, 2010. On October 11, 2010, Genmark's counsel replied with a revised settlement proposal that IRSI is now considering. See Yoon Decl. ¶ 3. The Parties request a further thirty day extension or continuation of the case management conference to facilitate their efforts to resolve this case without additional litigation. See Yoon Decl. ¶ 3. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Genmark Automation, Inc., and Defendant, Innovative Robotics, Inc., stipulate and agree that the Case Management Conference should be continued to a date that is at least 30 days after October 21, 2010, which will allow the Parties an additional 37 days to seek a final settlement of the case. Respectfully Submitted, Dated: October 14, 2010 McPharlin Sprinkles & Thomas LLP By: /s/ Robert E. Camors, Jr. Robert E. Camors, Jr. Attorneys for Plaintiff Genmark Automation, Inc. Dated: October 14, 2010 Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati By: /s/ James C. Yoon James C. Yoon Attorneys for Defendant Innovative Robotics Systems, Inc. -2STIPULATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE FOR 30 DAYS CASE NO. 05-CV-04707 PJH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED ATE UNIT ED S T S DISTRICT C THE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE IS CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 2, 2010 AT 2:00 P.M. ER N F D IS T IC T O R -3STIPULATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE FOR 30 DAYS CASE NO. 05-CV-04707 PJH A C LI FO Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton U.S. District Court Judge ilton s J. Ham e Phylli Judg R NIA Dated: October 19 , 2010 I ORD T IS SO ERED RT U O NO RT H 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE I hereby certify that counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant conferred on the 14th day of October, 2010, and that this stipulation was signed by the attorneys whose names appear above. Dated: October 14, 2010 /s/ James C. Yoon James C. Yoon Attorneys for Defendant Innovative Robotics Systems, Inc. -4STIPULATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE FOR 30 DAYS CASE NO. 05-CV-04707 PJH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 14th day of October, 2010, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically through the Court's CM/ECF system, with notice of case activity automatically generated and sent electronically to all parties. /s/ James C. Yoon James C. Yoon CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE CASE NO. 05-CV-04707 PJH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI JAMES C. YOON, CA Bar No. 177155 JYOON@WSGR.COM 650 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 Telephone: (650) 493-9300 Facsimile: (650) 493-6811 Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant INNOVATIVE ROBOTICS SYSTEMS, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION GENMARK AUTOMATION, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, Counterdefendant, CASE NO. 05-cv-04707 PJH DECLARATION OF JAMES C. YOON IN SUPPORT OF STIPULATION FOR v. ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE FOR 30 INNOVATIVE ROBOTICS SYSTEMS, INC., DAYS a California corporation, Defendant, Counterclaimant. YOON DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF STIPULATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING CMC CASE NO. 05-CV-04707 PJH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I, James C. Yoon, Jr., declare: 1. I am counsel of record for defendant Innovative Robotics Systems, Inc. ("IRSI"). I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein and, if called as a witness, I could and would testify competently thereto. 2. I make this declaration in support of the Stipulation for Order Continuing Case Management Conference for 30 Days, which is concurrently being filed herewith. 3. Since the filing of the Stipulation for Order Continuing Case Management Conference on September 8, 2010, and the Court's order of September 9, 2010 continuing the Case Management Conference to October 21, 2010, the parties met and conferred regarding the settlement documents drafted by plaintiff's counsel in August 2010. On September 15, 2010, defense counsel provided Genmark Automation, Inc. ("Genmark") with IRSI's proposed changes to the draft settlement documents. On October 11, 2010, Genmark's counsel replied with a revised settlement proposal that IRSI is now considering. In view of the fact that active settlement negotiations are still occurring, Mr. Robert Camors, counsel of record for plaintiff Genmark, and I think that it continues to be in the interests of justice, especially as between these two parties, to seek an order from the Court to defer the Court-ordered October 21, 2010 Case Management Conference for another thirt y days. We are of the view that this settlement process is still continuing to move forward. In the past, there have been two continuances sought and granted for this Case Management Conference. The case has been on Court-ordered stay commencing on November 3, 2006 until the present. The case was filed on November 16, 2005. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct and that his declaration was signed in Palo Alto, California Dated: October 14, 2010 /s/ James C. Yoon James C. Yoon YOON DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF STIPULATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING CMC CASE NO. 05-CV-04707 PJH

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?