Riverbed Technology, Inc. v. Silver Peak Systems, Inc.
Filing
90
ORDER GRANTING 89 JOINT MOTION to Dismiss. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 6/16/15. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/16/2015)
Case4:13-cv-02980-JSW Document89-1 Filed06/15/15 Page1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
MICHAEL J. SACKSTEDER (CSB No. 191605)
msacksteder@fenwick.com
BRYAN A. KOHM (CSB No. 233276)
bkohm@fenwick.com
LAUREN E. WHITTEMORE (CSB No. 255432)
lwhittemore@fenwick.com
WILLIAM A. MOSELEY (CSB No. 278740)
wmoseley@fenwick.com
FENWICK & WEST LLP
555 California Street, 12th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone:
415.875.2300
Facsimile:
415.281.1350
Attorneys for Defendant
SILVER PEAK SYSTEMS, INC.
9
Matthew B. Lehr (SBN 213139)
Anthony I. Fenwick (SBN 158667)
Gareth E. DeWalt (SBN 261479)
Igor Piryazev (SBN 253149)
DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL LLP
1600 El Camino Real
Menlo Park, California 94025
Telephone: (650) 752-2000
Facsimile: (650) 752-2111
matthew.lehr@davispolk.com
anthony.fenwick@davispolk.com
gareth.dewalt@davispolk.com
igor.piryazev@davispolk.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
RIVERBED TECHNOLOGY, INC.
10
SAN FRANCISCO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
F ENWICK & W EST LLP
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
OAKLAND DIVISION
14
15
RIVERBED TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
16
17
18
Plaintiff,
CASE NO. CV-13-2980
[PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL
WITH PREJUDICE
v.
SILVER PEAK SYSTEMS, INC,
19
Defendant.
20
21
In consideration of Plaintiff Riverbed Technology, Inc.’s and Defendant Silver Peak
22
Systems, Inc.’s Joint Motion to Dismiss With Prejudice all claims and counterclaims between
23
Plaintiff Riverbed Technology and Defendant Silver Peak Systems, Inc., it is ORDERED,
24
ADJUDGED AND DECREED that all claims and counterclaims asserted in this suit between
25
Plaintiff Riverbed Technology and Defendant Silver Peak Systems, Inc. are hereby dismissed
26
with prejudice.
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE
CASE NO. CV-13-2980
Case4:13-cv-02980-JSW Document89-1 Filed06/15/15 Page2 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
It is further ORDERED that all attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs are to be borne by the
party that incurred them.
SO ORDERED.
June 16, 2015
Dated: _______________
__________________________________
JUDGE OF THE DISTRICT COURT
6
7
8
9
10
SAN FRANCISCO
12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
F ENWICK & W EST LLP
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE
2
CASE NO. CV-13-2980
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?