Hyundai Electronics, et al v. Rambus, Inc.

Filing 4060

STIPULATION AND ORDER 4053 Extending Schedule for Briefing with Regard to Hynix's Bill of Costs. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 9/29/2011. (rmwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2011)

Download PDF
1 Parties listed on signature page 2 3 *E-FILED - 9/29/11* 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 12 HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR, INC., et al., 13 Plaintiffs, 14 vs. 15 CASE NO. CV 00-20905 RMW STIPULATION AND [] ORDER EXTENDING SCHEDULE FOR BRIEFING WITH REGARD TO HYNIX’S BILL OF COSTS RAMBUS INC., 16 17 Defendant. Judge: Ctrm: Honorable Ronald M. Whyte 6 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -1- STIPULATION AND [] ORDER RE: EXTENDING BRIEFING ON BILL OF COSTS CASE NO. CV 00-20905 RMW Case5:00-cv-20905-RMW Document4053 1 2 WHEREAS, Hynix filed its Bill of Costs Pursuant to Fed. Rules App. Proc., Rule 39(e) on May 27, 2011; 3 4 WHEREAS, the Court entered a Stipulation and Order Regarding Schedule for Briefing with Regard to Hynix’s Bill of Costs on June 23, 2011 (“June 23 Order”); 5 6 Filed09/14/11 Page2 of 4 WHEREAS, the mandate of the Federal Circuit issued in this case on August 9, 2011; 7 WHEREAS, Hynix filed a Supplemental Bill of Costs on August 24, 2011; 8 WHEREAS, Rambus’s Objections to Hynix’s Bill of Costs and Supplemental Bill 9 of Costs is currently due on September 15, 2011 pursuant to the briefing schedule set forth in the 10 June 23 Order; 11 WHEREAS, on August 18, 2011 and September 7, 2011, Hynix provided Rambus 12 with certain additional documents related to certain items in its Bill of Costs, including foreign- 13 language documents; 14 WHEREAS, Hynix has agreed to provide Rambus with English-language 15 translations of the foreign-language documents provided on September 7, 2011 as soon as they 16 become available; 17 18 NOW, THEREFORE, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE COURT, IT IS 19 HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and among the undersigned counsel for Hynix and 20 Rambus, that: 21 22 23 24 25 (1) Rambus has through and including September 19, 2011 to file its Objections to Hynix’s Bill of Costs and Supplemental Bill of Costs; (2) Hynix has through and including October 3, 2011 to file papers in response to Rambus’s Objections; (3) Hynix and Rambus have through and including October 3, 2011 to file a 26 statement identifying any cost items or objections that have been withdrawn based upon their 27 meet and confer efforts, and also to identify the cost items that remain in dispute; 28 -2- STIPULATION AND [] ORDER RE: EXTENDING BRIEFING ON S BILL OF COSTS CASE NO. CV 00-20905 RMW Case5:00-cv-20905-RMW Document4053 1 (4) Filed09/14/11 Page3 of 4 The schedule set forth above is subject to modification by Court order, either 2 upon motion from either party demonstrating good cause or on the Court’s own initiative, or by 3 agreement of the parties subject to Court approval. 4 DATED: September 14, 2011 5 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP By: /s/ Fred A. Rowley, Jr. Fred A. Rowley, Jr. 6 Counsel for Rambus Inc. 7 FRED A. ROWLEY, JR. (SBN 192298) MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP 355 South Grand Avenue, 35th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560 Telephone (213) 683-9100 Facsimile: (213) 687-3702 Email: Fred.Rowley@mto.com 8 9 10 11 12 DATED: September 14, 2011 13 KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP By: /s/ Theodore G. Brown, III Theodore G. Brown, III 14 Counsel for Hynix Semiconductor Inc.; Hynix Semiconductor America Inc.; Hynix Semiconductor U.K. Ltd.; and Hynix Semiconductor Deutschland GmbH 15 16 17 Theodore G. Brown, III (SBN 114672) KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP 1080 Marsh Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 Telephone (650) 326-2400 Facsimile: (650) 326-2422 Email: tbrown@kilpatricktownsend.com 18 19 20 21 22 23 ORDER IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 DATED: September ___, 2011 Honorable Ronald M. Whyte United States District Court Judge 26 27 28 -3- STIPULATION AND [] ORDER RE: EXTENDING BRIEFING ON S BILL OF COSTS CASE NO. CV 00-20905 RMW

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?