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)

Download PDF
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?