INPRO II Licensing SARL v. Lite-On Technology Corporation

Filing 21

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO POSTPONE SEPTEMBER 9, 2010 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND RELATED DATES re 19 Stipulation filed by Lite-On Technology Corporation. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 8/6/10. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/6/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
BECK, ROSS, BISMONTE & FINLEY, LLP FAIRMONT PLAZA 50 W. SAN FERNANDO ST., 1300 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113 TELEPHONE [phone]

Alfredo A. Bismonte (Cal. Bar. No. 136154) Joseph A. Greco (Cal. Bar. No. 104476) Jeremy M. Duggan (Cal. Bar. No. 229854) BECK, ROSS, BISMONTE & FINLEY, LLP 50 West San Fernando Street, Suite 1300 San Jose, California 95113 Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] Email: [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Lite-On Technology Corporation Jill F. Kopeikin (State Bar No. 160792) Email: [e-mail] DECHERT LLP 2440 W. El Camino Real Suite 700 Mountain View, California 94040-1499 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff INPRO II LICENSING SARL IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION Case No. C 10-02204 PJH STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO POSTPONE SEPTEMBER 9, 2010 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND RELATED DATES [CIVIL L.R. 7-12]

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

INPRO II LICENSING SARL, a Luxembourg Limited Liability Company Plaintiff, v. LITE-ON TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, a Taiwan Corporation, Defendant.

Case No. C 10-02204 PJH STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
BECK, ROSS, BISMONTE & FINLEY, LLP FAIRMONT PLAZA 50 W. SAN FERNANDO ST., 1300 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113 TELEPHONE [phone]

Defendant Lite-On Technology Corporation ("Lite-On") respectfully requests that the Court postpone the September 9, 2010 Case Management Conference and the related meet and confer and Rule 26 requirements, until after the Court decides Lite-On's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Improper Service, which was filed on July 28, 2010 (Docket No. 14) and noticed to be heard on September 1, 2010. Plaintiff INPRO II Licensing S.A.R.L. ("INPRO") does not object to the postponement requested by Lite-On. Lite-On argues in its motion that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and that INPRO has not properly served Lite-On. Lite-On has asked INPRO to either dismiss the case or agree to the postponement requested herein. INPRO disputes Lite-On's arguments. However, lead counsel for INPRO is on vacation and is unavailable to respond appropriately to Lite-On's motion, and in any event cannot make the September 1, 2010 hearing date. Accordingly, counsel for the parties have conferred and have agreed to request that the Court issue the following order: 1. The Case Management Conference scheduled on September 9, 2010 is hereby

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

vacated and shall be reset by the Court following the Court's decision on Lite-On's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Improper Service ("the Motion"). 2. The schedule establishing the meet and confer deadlines relating to the Case

Management Conference and the Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 requirements is also vacated and shall be reset following the Court's decision on the Motion. New dates for those requirements will be established by any date the Court sets for the Case Management Conference after deciding the Motion. 3. Lite-On shall renotice the hearing date of the Motion for September 15, 2010.

Dated: July 30, 2010

BECK, ROSS, BISMONTE & FINLEY, LLP /s/ By: Joseph A. Greco Attorneys for Defendant Lite-On Technology Corporation

Case No. C 10-02204 PJH STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
BECK, ROSS, BISMONTE & FINLEY, LLP FAIRMONT PLAZA 50 W. SAN FERNANDO ST., 1300 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113 TELEPHONE [phone]

Dated: July 30, 2010

DECHERT LLP /s/ By: Jill F. Kopeikin Attorneys for Plaintiff INPRO II LICENSING SARL

As the attorney e-filing this document, I hereby attest that Jill F. Kopeikin has concurred in this filing. Dated: July 30, 2010 ____________/s/____________ Joseph A. Greco

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
S DISTRICT TE C TA

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Case No. C 10-02204 PJH STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 2

ER

N

F D IS T IC T O R

A

C

LI

FO

16

Judge P

hyllis J.

Hamilto

n

R NIA

15

UNIT ED

14

8/6/10 Dated: ____________________

____________________________ Phyllis J. Hamilton D ERE O ORD IT IS S U.S. District Court Judge
RT U O
S
NO

RT

H