IXI Mobile (R&D) Ltd. et al v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al
Filing
170
ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting (Docket Nos. 160 in case 4:15-cv-03755-HSG and 169 in case 4:15-cv-03752-HSG) Stipulation Re: Specially Setting Hearing on Motion for Leave to Amend its Infringement Contentions and Asserted Claims. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/15/2019)
1
2
3
4
5
6
John V. Picone III, Bar No. 187226
jpicone@hopkinscarley.com
Jennifer S. Coleman, Bar No. 213210
jcoleman@hopkinscarley.com
HOPKINS & CARLEY
A Law Corporation
The Letitia Building
70 South First Street
San Jose, CA 95113-2406
8
mailing address:
P.O. Box 1469
San Jose, CA 95109-1469
Telephone:
(408) 286-9800
Facsimile:
(408) 998-4790
9
Additional counsel in signature block
7
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
13
IXI MOBILE (R&D) LTD. and IXI IP,
LLC,
Plaintiffs,
14
15
16
CASE NO. 4:15-CV-03752-HSG
v.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., et al.,
Defendants.
17
18
19
20
IXI MOBILE (R&D) LTD. and IXI IP,
LLC,
21
22
23
24
Plaintiffs,
v.
APPLE INC.
CASE NO. 4:15-CV-03755-HSG
(RELATED CASE)
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE:
SPECIALLY SETTING HEARING ON
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
AMEND ITS INFRINGEMENT
CONTENTIONS AND ASSERTED
CLAIMS
Defendant.
25
26
27
28
H OPKINS & C ARLEY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN JOSE
626\3222781.1
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: SPECIALLY SETTING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ITS
INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS AND ASSERTED CLAIMS
1
Pursuant to this Court’s Orders dated February 21, 2019 and March 11, 2019, Plaintiffs IXI
2
Mobile (R&D) Ltd. and IXI IP, LLC (collectively “IXI” or “Plaintiffs”), Defendants Samsung
3
Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (hereinafter “Samsung”), and
4
Defendant Apple Inc. (hereinafter “Apple”) (collectively “Defendants”) submit this Stipulation to
5
and [Proposed] Order Specially Setting Hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Amend its
6
Infringement Contentions and Asserted Claims filed March 7, 2019.
7
8
9
10
11
12
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on February 21, 2019, a Case Management Conference was held before
Honorable Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Case Management Conference, the Court ordered, among other
things, that:
1)
Plaintiffs would have 14 days from the date of the hearing, or to March 7, 2019, to
13
file its Motion for Amend Leave to Amend its Infringement Contentions and Asserted Claims
14
(“Motion to Amend”);
15
16
17
18
19
20
2)
Defendants would have 14 days from the date of the motion filing date to file
opposition to Motion to Amend;
3)
Plaintiffs would have seven days from filing of opposition to the Motion to Amend
to file a reply to Motion to Amend; and
4)
The Parties were to meet and confer and e-file a stipulation and proposed order
setting a Motion to Amend hearing date on shortened time basis.
21
WHEREAS, on March 7, 2019, Plaintiffs filed their Motion to Amend with a hearing date
22
for April 18, 2019, indicating that IXI was available as early as mid-April though IXI had not yet
23
agreed with Defendants on a hearing date;
24
WHEREAS, on March 11, 2019, the Court ordered that the “[p]arties were directed at the
25
February 21st motion hearing to meet and confer and e-file a stipulation and proposed order setting
26
a motion hearing date on shortened time basis” and that “that has not occurred.” Dkt. No. 167;
27
28
H OPKINS & C ARLEY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN JOSE
WHEREAS, the earliest available hearing date before the Court for the Motion to Amend
is June 6, 2019 per the Court’s Scheduling Notes.
-2STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: SPECIALLY SETTING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ITS
INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS AND ASSERTED CLAIMS
1
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court’s direction to seek an earlier date and as set forth in its
2
February 21 and March 11 Orders, the Parties have now met and conferred and desire to have the
3
Motion to Amend scheduled to be specially set on the earliest date that all parties are available for
4
a hearing on the Motion to Amend, which is May 9, 2019.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
H OPKINS & C ARLEY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN JOSE
-3STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: SPECIALLY SETTING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ITS
INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS AND ASSERTED CLAIMS
1
2
STIPULATION
WHEREFORE, the parties agree and stipulate that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend shall be
3
heard on May 9, 2019, at 2:00 p.m., or on another date convenient to the Court. No other
4
deadlines will be affected by the requested relief.
5
6
7
Dated: March 14, 2019
HOPKINS & CARLEY
A Law Corporation
8
9
10
11
12
13
By: /s/ John V. Picone III
John V. Picone III
jpicone@hopkinscarley.com.
Jennifer S. Coleman
jcoleman@hopkinscarley.com
HOPKINS & CARLEY
A Law Corporation
The Letitia Building
70 South First Street
San Jose, CA 95113-2406
14
Jason D. Cassady (pro hac vice)
jcassady@caldwellcc.com
Hamad M. Hamad (pro hac vice)
hhamad@caldwellcc.com
Robert Seth Reich, Jr. (pro hac vice)
CALDWELL CASSADY & CURRY P.C.
2101 Cedar Springs Rd. Ste. 1000
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: (214) 888-4848
15
16
17
18
19
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
IXI MOBILE (R&D) LTD. and IXI IP, LLC
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
H OPKINS & C ARLEY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN JOSE
-4STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: SPECIALLY SETTING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ITS
INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS AND ASSERTED CLAIMS
1
Dated: March 14, 2019
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
2
3
By: /s/ Todd M. Friedman
Gregory S. Arovas, P.C.
Todd M. Friedman, P.C.
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
601 Lexington Avenue
New York, New York 10022
Telephone: (212) 446-4800
Facsimile: (212) 446-4900
greg.arovas@kirkland.com
todd.friedman@kirkland.com
4
5
6
7
8
David Rokach (admitted pro hac vice)
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
300 N. LaSalle
Chicago, Illinois 60654
Telephone: (312) 862-2000
Facsimile: (212) 862-2200
david.rokach@kirkland.com
9
10
11
12
Brandon Brown
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
555 California Street
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone: (415) 439-1400
Facsimile: (415) 439-1500
brandon.brown@kirkland.com
13
14
15
16
Attorneys for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
and Samsung Electronics America, Inc.
17
18
19
Dated: March 14, 2019
SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT
20
21
22
23
24
By: /s/ Harrison J. Frahn IV
Harrison J. Frahn IV
SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP
2475 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: (650) 251-5000
Facsimile: (650) 251-5002
hfrahn@stblaw.com
25
26
27
28
H OPKINS & C ARLEY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN JOSE
-5STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: SPECIALLY SETTING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ITS
INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS AND ASSERTED CLAIMS
1
2
ATTESTATION OF E-FILED SIGNATURE
Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby certify that I have obtained the concurrence in
3
the filing of this document from all signatories for whom a signature is indicated by a
4
“conformed” signature (/ s /) within this electronically filed document and I have on file records
5
to support this concurrence for subsequent production to the Court if so ordered or for inspection
6
upon request.
7
8
9
Executed on March 14, 2019, at San Jose, California.
HOPKINS & CARLEY
A Law Corporation
10
11
12
By: /s/ John V. Picone III
John V. Picone III
Attorneys for Defendants
IXI MOBILE (R&D), LTD., and IXI IP, LLC
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
H OPKINS & C ARLEY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN JOSE
-6STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: SPECIALLY SETTING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ITS
INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS AND ASSERTED CLAIMS
1
ORDER
2
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to
3
Amend its Infringement Contentions and Asserted Claims filed March 7, 2019 will be heard on
4
May 9, 2019 at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 2, Fourth Floor, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, CA 94612.
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
7
Dated: March 15, 2019
HON. HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
H OPKINS & C ARLEY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN JOSE
-7STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: SPECIALLY SETTING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ITS
INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS AND ASSERTED CLAIMS
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?