Sun Microsystems Inc., v. Hynix Semiconductor Inc. et al

Filing 688

STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING HYNIX'S REQUEST TO FILE A SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBIT LIST re 678 Stipulation, filed by Hynix Semiconductor America Inc., Hynix Semiconductor Inc. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 5/5/09. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/5/2009)

Download PDF
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 KENNETH R. O'ROURKE (S.B. #120144) korourke@omm.com PAUL B. SALVATY (S.B. #171507) psalvaty@omm.com STEVEN H. BERGMAN (S.B. #180542) sbergman@omm.com O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 400 South Hope Street Los Angeles, CA 90071-2899 Telephone: (213) 430-6000 Facsimile: (213) 430-6407 MICHAEL F. TUBACH (S.B. #145955) mtubach@omm.com THOMAS BROWN (S.B. #182916) tbrown@omm.com O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3823 Telephone: (415) 984-8700 Facsimile: (415) 984-8701 Attorneys for Defendants HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC. and HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SUN MICROSYSTEMS, INC., a California corporation, and Unisys Corporation, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiffs, v. HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC., a Korean corporation, HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA INC., a California corporation, et al., Defendants. Case Nos. C 06-01665 PJH Assigned for all purposes to the Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING HYNIX'S REQUEST TO FILE A SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBIT LIST Pretrial Conf. Date: May 7, 2009 Time: 2:30 p.m. Place: Courtroom 5, 17th Floor LA2:884151.3 STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SUPP. EXHIBIT LIST CASE NO. C 06-01665 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 STIPULATION This Stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-12 between Plaintiff Sun Microsystems, Inc. ("Sun") and Defendants Hynix Semiconductor Inc. and Hynix Semiconductor America Inc. ("Hynix") and Nanya Technology Corporation and Nanya Technology Corporation USA ("Nanya") is made with reference to the following facts: A. WHEREAS, pursuant to a prior order of the Court, the parties Exhibit Lists were filed on March 31, 2009 and re-submitted without change on April 8, 2009 along with the pre-trial statement; and B. WHEREAS, Magistrate Judge Spero had ordered Sun to produce copies of its settlement agreements with other defendants with which it had settled 30 days before the filing of the pre-trial statement; and C. WHEREAS, Hynix received a copy of the Elpida settlement agreement and the cover letter from Sun setting forth the amount Elpida paid to Sun after the parties had exchanged exhibit lists for submission on March 31, 2009; and D. WHEREAS, Hynix listed all of Sun's other settlement agreements with other DRAM manufacturers, including Samsung, Infineon, Mitsubishi, Mosel and Winbond, on its Exhibit List submitted on March 31, 2009; and E. WHEREAS, Hynix represents that it inadvertently left off its Exhibit List the cover letter that accompanied production from Sun of the Mitsubishi, Mosel and Winbond settlement agreements. Said cover letter set forth the amounts Mitsubishi, Mosel and Winbond paid to Sun in settlement; and F. WHEREAS, Hynix seeks to file a Supplemental Exhibit List containing these three documents, namely the Elpida settlement agreement and the two cover letters setting forth the amounts that Elpida, Mitsubishi, Mosel and Winbond paid to Sun in settlement; and G. WHEREAS, Hynix contacted Sun promptly upon discovering the oversight, and Sun stated it did not object to Hynix filing a supplemental exhibit list with these items. LA2:884151.3 -1- STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SUPP. EXHIBIT LIST CASE NO. C 06-01665 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 LA2:884151.3 THEREFORE, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE COURT, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED BETWEEN Sun, Hynix and Nanya as follows: 1. Hynix may file its Supplemental Exhibit List, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and 2. Sun does not object to Hynix filing its Supplemental Exhibit List. This stipulation does not affect Sun's objections as to the admissibility of the documents identified in Hynix's Exhibit List or Supplemental Exhibit List, other than an objection based on failure to include the Elpida settlement agreement and the two cover letters setting forth the amounts that Elpida, Mitsubishi, Mosel and Winbond paid to Sun in settlement on Hynix's Exhibit List submitted on March 31, 2009, which objection is hereby waived. SO STIPULATED. Dated: May 1, 2009 O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP By: /Steven H. Bergman/ Steven H. Bergman Attorneys for Defendants HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC. and HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA INC. Dated: May 1, 2009 ORRICK HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP By: /Howard M. Ullman/ Howard M. Ullman Attorneys for Defendants NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION and NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION USA -2- STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SUPP. EXHIBIT LIST CASE NO. C 06-01665 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 Dated: May 1, 2009 CROWELL & MORING LLP By: /David D. Cross/ David D. Cross Attorneys for Plaintiff SUN MICROSYSTEMS, INC. ATTESTATION OF FILING Pursuant to General Order 45.X.B, I hereby attest that I have obtained concurrence in the filing of this document from the attorneys for the other parties listed in the signature blocks above. /Steven H. Bergman/ Steven H. Bergman LA2:884151.3 -3- STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SUPP. EXHIBIT LIST CASE NO. C 06-01665 PJH 1 2 3 4 [PROPOSED] ORDER PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dated: 5/5/09 UNIT ED 5 UNIT ED S S DISTRICT TE C TA ER N F D IS T IC T O R A C LI FO Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton R NIA IT IS SO ORDERED ER N F D IS T IC T O R LA2:884151.3 STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SUPP. EXHIBIT LIST CASE NO. C 06-01665 PJH A C LI FO hyllis Judge P J. Hami lton R NIA D RDERE S SO O IT I Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton United States District Judge RT U O NO S S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O RT H NO RT H

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?