Fuzzysharp Technologies Incorporated v. Ziilabs Inc., Ltd.

Filing 66

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING INDAVERTENTLY PRODUCED PRIVILEGED MATERIALS. Signed by Magistrate Judge James Larson on 8/17/09. (jlsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/17/2009) Modified on 8/18/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF).

Case4:07-cv-05948-SBA Document63

Filed08/13/09 Page1 of 4

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
DECHERT LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S I L I C O N VALLEY

David Fink (pro hac vice) [e-mail] FINK & JOHNSON 7519 Apache Plume Houston, TX 77071 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Duncan M. McNeill (Cal. Bar No. 136416) [e-mail] 1514 Van Dyke Avenue San Francisco, CA 94124 Telephone: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant FuzzySharp Technologies Incorporated Jonathan D. Baker (CSB No.: 196062) [e-mail] DECHERT LLP 2440 W. El Camino Real, Suite 700 Mountain View, California 94040 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant 3DLabs Inc., Ltd. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION FUZZYSHARP TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED, Plaintiff, v. 3DLABS INC., LTD., Defendant. 3DLABS INC., LTD., Counterclaimant, v. FUZZYSHARP TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED, Counter-Defendant. Case No. C07-CV-5948-SBA-JL STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING INADVERTENTLY PRODUCED PRIVILEGED MATERIALS OR INFORMATION Honorable Magistrate Judge James Larson

; CASE NO.: C07-CV-5948-SBA-JL

13577261

Case4:07-cv-05948-SBA Document63

Filed08/13/09 Page2 of 4

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
DECHERT LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S I L I C O N VALLEY

In order to ensure that neither party waives any privilege through the inadvertent production of privileged materials or information, and pursuant to Rule 502 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant FuzzySharp Technologies Incorporated, and Defendant and Counterclaimant 3DLabs Inc., Ltd., by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. Inadvertent production or disclosure of documents or information subject to the

attorney-client privilege, work product immunity, or any other applicable privilege shall not constitute a waiver of, nor a prejudice to, any claim that such or related material is privileged or protected by the work product immunity or any other applicable privilege, provided that the producing party notifies the receiving party in writing promptly after discovery of such inadvertent production. 2. Such inadvertently produced documents or information, including all copies

thereof, shall be returned to the producing party or destroyed immediately upon request. 3. No use shall be made of such documents or information during deposition or at

trial, nor shall such documents or information be shown to anyone who has not already been given access to them subsequent to the request that they be returned. 4. In the case of an inadvertently produced document, the producing party shall then

provide a privilege log identifying such inadvertently produced document. 5. The receiving party may move the Court for an Order compelling production of

any inadvertently produced document or information, but the motion shall not assert as a ground for production the fact or circumstances of the inadvertent productions or raise any other issue concerning such inadvertent production that is inconsistent with Rule 502 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, nor shall the motion disclose or otherwise use the content of the inadvertently produced /// /// /// /// ///
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING INADVERTENTLY PRODUCED PRIVILEGED MATERIALS OR INFORMATION; CASE NO.: C07-CV-5948-SBA-JL

1

13577261

Case4:07-cv-05948-SBA Document63

Filed08/13/09 Page3 of 4

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
DECHERT LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S I L I C O N VALLEY

document or information (beyond any information appearing on the above-referenced privilege log) in any way in connection with any such motion. IT IS SO STIPULATED: Dated: August 13, 2009 By: /s/ David Fink David Fink Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant FuzzySharp Technologies Incorporated

Dated: August 13, 2009

By: /s/ Jonathan D. Baker Jonathan D. Baker Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant 3DLabs Inc., Ltd.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING INADVERTENTLY PRODUCED PRIVILEGED MATERIALS OR INFORMATION; CASE NO.: C07-CV-5948-SBA-JL

2

13577261

Case4:07-cv-05948-SBA Document63

Filed08/13/09 Page4 of 4

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
DECHERT LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S I L I C O N VALLEY

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45 I, Jonathan D. Baker, attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on August 13, 2009 at Mountain View, California. By: /s/ Jonathan D. Baker Jonathan D. Baker

PURSUANT TO THIS STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 17, 2009

The Honorable James Larson United States District Magistrate Judge

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING INADVERTENTLY PRODUCED PRIVILEGED MATERIALS OR INFORMATION; CASE NO.: C07-CV-5948-SBA-JL

3

13577261