Apple Inc. v. Amazon.Com, Inc.
Filing
57
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE FILING OF AND RESPONDING TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT re 55 Stipulation filed by Apple Inc. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 11/17/11. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/17/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
DAVID R. EBERHART (S.B. #195474)
deberhart@omm.com
RYAN J. PADDEN (S.B. #204515)
rpadden@omm.com
DAVID J. SEPANIK (S.B. #221527)
dsepanik@omm.com
O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor
San Francisco, California 94111-3823
Telephone:
(415)984-8700
Facsimile:
(415)984-8701
Attorneys for Plaintiff
APPLE INC.
8
ADDITIONAL COUNSEL ON SIGNATURE PAGE
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
13
APPLE INC., a California corporation,
Plaintiff and CounterDefendant,
14
15
v.
16
17
Case No. CV 11-01327 PJH
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER RE FILING OF AND
RESPONDING TO SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT PURSUANT
TO F.R.C.P. 15(a)(2)-(3)
AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware
corporation, and AMAZON DIGITAL
SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation,
18
19
Defendants and CounterClaimants.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION RE FILING OF AND
RESPONDING TO
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
CASE NO. CV 11-01327 PJH
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) and Defendants and CounterClaimants Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon Digital Services, Inc. (collectively, “Amazon”), hereby
consent and stipulate as follows:
WHEREAS, Apple filed a Complaint on March 18, 2011;
WHEREAS, Apple’s currently-operative complaint is its Amended Complaint filed on
April 8, 2011;
WHEREAS, Apple seeks to file a Second Amended Complaint;
WHEREAS, Apple’s Second Amended Complaint is submitted concurrently herewith in
accordance with Civil L.R. 10-1;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), Amazon consents to
Apple’s filing of the Second Amended Complaint;
WHEREAS, by consenting to the filing of a Second Amended Complaint, Amazon is not
in any way conceding, and expressly reserves its rights to contest by all permissible procedures
and means, (a) the truth of any factual allegation in the Second Amended Complaint; and (b) the
legal or factual adequacy of any claim asserted in the Second Amended Complaint.
IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED AND AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1.
That pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), Apple’s Second Amended
Complaint shall be the now-operative pleading in the above-captioned litigation;
2.
That, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3), Amazon shall have 30
days from service of the Second Amended Complaint in which to answer or otherwise respond to
the Second Amended Complaint
22
23
24
25
In accordance with N.D. Cal. General Order No. 45, Section X, the filer of this document
hereby attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the other
signatory hereto.
26
27
28
IT IS SO STIPULATED:
STIPULATION RE FILING OF AND
RESPONDING TO
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
CASE NO. CV 11-01327 PJH
1
Dated: November 16, 2011
DAVID R. EBERHART
RYAN J. PADDEN
DAVID J. SEPANIK
O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
2
3
4
By:
/s/ David R. Eberhart
David R. Eberhart
Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant
APPLE INC.
5
6
7
8
Dated: November 16, 2011
MARTIN R. GLICK
CLARA J. SHIN
SARAH J. GIVAN
HOWARD RICE NEMEROVSKI CANADY
FALK & RABIN
A Professional Corporation
9
10
11
12
By:
/s/ Martin R. Glick
Martin R. Glick
Attorney for Defendants and CounterClaimants AMAZON.COM, INC. and
AMAZON DIGITAL SERVICES, INC.
13
14
15
16
ORDER
17
Based upon the foregoing Stipulation and good cause appearing, IT IS SO ORDERED.
18
November 17
DATED: ___________________, 2011.
Ju
ER
H
26
27
28
2
R NIA
amilton
llis J. H
dge Phy
FO
RT
25
DERED
O OR
IT IS S
NO
24
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
LI
23
UNIT
ED
22
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
HONORABLE PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
RT
U
O
21
S
20
A
19
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
STIPULATION RE FILING OF AND
RESPONDING TO
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
CASE NO. CV 11-01327 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?