Google Inc. v. Netlist, Inc.

Filing 86

STIPULATION and Proposed Order re 85 Joint Motion to Consolidate Cases filed by Google Inc., Netlist, Inc.. (Pollack, Howard) (Filed on 1/6/2010) Modified on 1/7/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF).

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

Howard G. Pollack (CA Bar No. 162897/[e-mail]) Shelley K. Mack (CA Bar No. 209596/[e-mail]) Robert J. Kent (CA Bar No. 250905/[e-mail]) FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 500 Arguello Street, Suite 500 Redwood City, CA 94063 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff GOOGLE INC. Adrian M. Pruetz (CA Bar No. 118215/[e-mail]) Erica J. Pruetz (CA Bar No. 227712/[e-mail]) PRUETZ LAW GROUP LLP 200 N. Sepulveda Boulevard, Suite 1525 El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Steven R. Hansen (CA Bar No. 198401/[e-mail]) Enoch H. Liang (CA Bar No. 212324/[e-mail]) LEE, TRAN & LIANG APLC 601 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 4025 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Defendant NETLIST, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (OAKLAND DIVISION)

GOOGLE INC., Plaintiff, v. NETLIST, INC., Defendant.

Case No. C 08-04144 SBA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES [Civ. L.R. 7-12]

AND RELATED CASE.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES [Civ. L.R. 7-12] Case No. C 08-04144 SBA (JCS)

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 Google Inc. and Defendant Netlist, Inc. (the "Parties") believe that Netlist, Inc. v. Google Inc., Case No. C-09-05718 SBA ("Netlist Action"), filed on December 4, 2009 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, and related to this case by order of December 28, 2009, should be consolidated with this case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a). The two actions involve common questions of law and fact that make them substantially overlapping and warrant consolidation. The patent asserted in Netlist's new complaint is related to the patent at issue in this lawsuit, and their specifications are largely identical. Both cases also accuse the same Google devices of infringement. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY THE PARTIES, by and through their counsel of record, and the Parties jointly request: (a) that the Netlist Action be consolidated with the present action, (b) that the existing scheduling order in this case be vacated, and (c) that the Court schedule a case management conference to determine the schedule for the consolidated cases.

Dated: January 6, 2010

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

By: /s/ Howard G. Pollack Howard G. Pollack Attorneys for Plaintiff GOOGLE INC. Dated: January 6, 2010 LEE, TRAN & LIANG APLC

By: /s/ Steven R. Hansen Steven R. Hansen Attorneys for Defendant NETLIST, INC.

2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES [Civ. L.R. 7-12] Case No. C 08-04144 SBA (JCS)

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 /// /// /// ///

DECLARATION OF CONSENT Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B) regarding signatures, I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from Steven R. Hansen. Dated: January 6, 2010 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

By: /s/ Howard G. Pollack Howard G. Pollack Attorneys for Plaintiff GOOGLE INC.

3

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES [Civ. L.R. 7-12] Case No. C 08-04144 SBA (JCS)

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
50692712.doc

PROPOSED ORDER Having considered the joint stipulation and motion of the parties, the Court agrees that the interests of the parties and the efficiency of the Court's docket will be served by consolidation. Accordingly it is hereby ORDERED that Netlist, Inc. v. Google Inc., Case No. C-09-05718 SBA (" Netlist Action" ), filed on December 4, 2009 in this court be consolidated for purposes of discovery and trial with the present action and that the existing case and trial schedule in the present action is hereby vacated. The Court will hold a further case management conference in the consolidated action on ___________________, 2010 at __________________. The parties will file a joint case management statement and proposed case schedule no later than _________________, 2010.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: ____________________ HON. SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG JUDGE OF THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT

4

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES [Civ. L.R. 7-12] Case No. C 08-04144 SBA (JCS)

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
50692712.doc

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that on January 6, 2010, all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of the STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES [Civ. L.R. 7-12] via the Court's CM/ECF system per Local Rule 5-4 and General Order 45. Any other counsel of record will be served by first class mail. /s/Howard G. Pollack Howard G. Pollack

5

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES [Civ. L.R. 7-12] Case No. C 08-04144 SBA (JCS)