Google Inc. et al v. Egger et al

Filing 134

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 42 Motion to Dismiss, Transfer, or Stay; denying 64 Motion to Strike. (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/22/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The court grants defendants' motion to stay pending resolution of the case in the Eastern District of Texas or a decision by that court to transfer the action to the Northern District of California. By this order the court expresses no opinion on whether the motion to transfer tho this district pending in the Eastern District of Texas should be granted or denied. The motion to dismiss plaintiff L. Daniel Egger ("Egger") is granted on the basis of his statement that he does not now and will not in the future assert any ownership rights in the patentsat-issue. See Decl. of Lee Kaplan ISO Defs.' Reply Ex. 10 (Declaration of L. Daniel Egger) ("I owned the patents directly from September 1998 until February 2005, when I assigned them to Software Rights Archive, Inc. . . ."); Id. at Ex. 12 (Egger's Assignment Agreement) ("[Egger] hereby sells, assigns, and transfers to [Software Rights Archive, Inc.] his entire right, title, and interest in v. L. DANIEL EGGER, SOFTWARE RIGHTS ARCHIVE, LLC and SITE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendants. GOOGLE INC., AOL LLC, YAHOO! INC., IAC SEARCH & MEDIA, INC., and LYCOS, INC., Plaintiffs, No. C-08-03172 RMW IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION E-FILED on 8/22/09

ORDER REGARDING MOTION TO DISMISS, TRANSFER, OR STAY [Docket No. 42, 64]

ORDER REGARDING MOTION TO DISMISS, TRANSFER, OR STAY JAS

--No. C-08-03172 RMW

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

and to the Patents . . ."). This dismissal is conditioned on Egger filing a signed stipulation to that effect. The court recognizes, and Egger's stipulation may provide, that Egger has an interest in the outcome of the litigation or may be entitled to some payment by Software Rights Archive for his purported past sale or assignment of any ownership interests in the patents. The motion to dismiss Site Technologies is denied. The motion to strike is denied.

DATED:

8/21/09 RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge

ORDER REGARDING MOTION TO DISMISS, TRANSFER, OR STAY JAS 2

--No. C-08-03172 RMW

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Notice of this document has been electronically sent to: Counsel for Search Engines: Richard S.J. Hung Michael A. Jacobs Jennifer A. Kash Claude Michael Stern Kristin Janet Madigan Juanita R. Brooks Jason W. Wolff Jerry T. Yen Ramon K Tabtiang Thomas Bernard Walsh , IV [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

Counsel for Daniel Egger, Software Rights Archive, et al.: 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 Counsel for Murray & Murray, P.C.: 14 Joseph J. De Hope , Jr. 15 Counsel for Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C.: 16 Mark Gregory Parnes 17 18 19 20 21 Dated: 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
ORDER REGARDING MOTION TO DISMISS, TRANSFER, OR STAY JAS 3 --No. C-08-03172 RMW

Jay David Ellwanger Jeffrey A. Potts Lee Landa Kaplan Narasa Raju Duvvuri Thomas Frank Smegal , Jr.

[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

[e-mail]

[e-mail]

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel that have not registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program.

8/22/09

JAS Chambers of Judge Whyte