Phoenix Technologies Ltd. v. VMware, Inc.

Filing 465

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 464 Stipulation REGARDING FILING OF VMWARE'S AMENDED BILL OF COSTS & PHOENIX'S OBJECTIONS.; Amended Pleadings due by 9/8/2017; Objections due by 9/22/2017. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/30/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664) MJacobs@mofo.com ARTURO J. GONZÁLEZ (CA SBN 121490) AGonzalez@mofo.com ALEXIS A. AMEZCUA (CA SBN 247507) AAmezcua@mofo.com DIANA B. KRUZE (CA SBN 247605) DKruze@mofo.com CHRISTOPHER L. ROBINSON (CA SBN 260778) ChristopherRobinson@mofo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415.268.7000 Facsimile: 415.268.7522 COOLEY LLP MICHAEL A. ATTANASIO (151529) (mattanasio@cooley.com) WHITTY SOMVICHIAN (194463) (wsomvichian@cooley.com) AMANDA A. MAIN (260814) (amain@cooley.com) DREW KONING (263082) (dkoning@cooley.com) AARTI G. REDDY (274889) (areddy@cooley.com) 101 California Street, 5th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 693-2000 Facsimile: (415) 693-2222 Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant VMWARE, INC. Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant PHOENIX TECHNOLOGIES LTD. 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 OAKLAND DIVISION 14 15 16 PHOENIX TECHNOLOGIES LTD., a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff, 17 18 19 v. Defendant. 24 Judge: Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. VMWARE, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Counterclaimant, 22 23 STIPULATION REGARDING FILING OF VMWARE’S AMENDED BILL OF COSTS AND PHOENIX’S OBJECTIONS THERETO VMWARE, INC., a Delaware Corporation, 20 21 Case No. 15-cv-01414-HSG v. PHOENIX TECHNOLOGIES LTD., a Delaware Corporation, 25 Counterdefendant. 26 27 28 STIPULATION RE TIMING OF AMENDED BOC CASE NO. 15-CV-01414-HSG sf-3818925 1. 1 Pursuant to Local Rule 7-12, Plaintiff Phoenix Technologies Ltd. and Defendant VMware, 2 Inc. (collectively, “the parties”) by and through their respective counsel, stipulate to the following 3 relating to VMware’s Bill of Costs: WHEREAS, pursuant to Local Rule 54-2(b), the parties have met and conferred regarding 4 5 VMware’s Bill of Costs, filed on August 17, 2017 (Dkt. 461); and WHEREAS, in an effort to resolve disagreement about the taxable costs claimed in the bill, 6 7 VMware has agreed to withdraw its request for certain costs; and WHEREAS, VMware and Phoenix disagree about certain remaining taxable costs and 8 9 Phoenix will object to those costs; and WHEREAS, the current deadline for Phoenix to object to VMware’s Bill of Costs is August 10 11 31, 2017; and WHEREAS, the parties agree it would be most efficient for VMware to file an amended bill 12 13 of costs and for Phoenix to file its objections thereafter. 14 NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate to and request an extension of the Bill of 15 Costs schedule as follows: VMware has until Friday, September 8, 2017, to file an amended Bill of 16 Costs and Phoenix has until Friday, September 22, 2017, to file its objections. 17 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 18 /// 19 /// 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION RE TIMING OF AMENDED BOC CASE NO. 15-CV-01414-HSG sf-3818925 2. 1 Dated August 29 2017 d: 9, MORR RISON & FO OERSTER L LLP 2 By: 3 4 A Attorneys fo Defendant or t a Counter and rclaimant V VMWARE, INC. 5 6 7 /s/ Arturo J González1 J. A ARTURO J. GONZÁLE . EZ Dated August 29 2017 d: 9, COOL LEY LLP 8 By: 9 10 /s/ Whitty S Somvichian W Whitty Somv vichian A Attorneys fo Plaintiff an Counterd or nd defendant P PHOENIX T TECHNOLO OGIES LTD. 11 12 IT IS SO ORDE S ERED. 13 14 Dated August 30, 2017 d: 3 15 H Honorable H Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 I, Arturo J. González, am the EC User who ID and p o CF ose password are being used to file this e Decla aration. In compliance with Civil L. 5-1(i)(3) . I hereby at c w .R. ttest that Wh hitty Somvichian has concu urred in this filing. STIPUL LATION RE TIM MING OF AMEND DED BOC CASE NO. 15-CV-014 414-HSG sf-3818925 3.

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?