Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. v. Chipmos Technologies Inc

Filing 108

ORDER APPROVING 96 STIPULATED REQUEST TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR CHIPMOS'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 7/14/2011. (jflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/14/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Greg L. Lippetz (State Bar No. 154228) glippetz@jonesday.com Jacqueline K. S. Lee (State Bar No. 247705) jkslee@jonesday.com JONES DAY 1755 Embarcadero Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Telephone: 650-739-3939 Facsimile: 650-739-3900 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant FREESCALE SEMICONDUCTOR, INC. **E-Filed 7/14/2011** RONALD S. LEMIEUX (SB# 120822) ronlemieux@paulhastings.com VIDYA R. BHAKAR (SB# 220210) vbhakar@cooley.com SHANEE Y.W. NELSON (SB# 221310) shaneenelson@paulhastings.com COOLEY LLP 3000 El Camino Real Five Palo Alto Square Palo Alto, CA 94306-2155 Telephone: (650) 843-5000 Facsimile: (650) 849-7400 Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaim-Plaintiff CHIPMOS TECHNOLOGIES, INC 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 SAN JOSE DIVISION 12 13 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc., 14 15 Plaintiff, v. 16 ChipMOS Technologies, Inc., 17 Defendant. 18 Case No. C-09-03689-JF-RS STIPULATED REQUEST AND ------------------- ORDER TO EXTEND [PROPOSED] BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR CHIPMOS’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Date: N/A Time: N/A Courtroom: 3, 5th Floor Hon. Jeremy Fogel Judge: 19 20 Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, Plaintiff Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. (“Freescale”) and 21 Defendant ChipMOS Technologies, Inc. (“ChipMOS,” and together with Freescale, the “Parties”) 22 jointly submit this stipulated request to extend the briefing schedule for ChipMOS’s Motion for 23 Summary Judgment. 24 According to Civil Local Rule 7-2, “all motions must be filed, served and noticed in 25 writing on the motion calendar of the assigned Judge for hearing not less than 35 days after 26 service of the motion.” Civil Local Rule 7-3 provides that “[a]ny opposition to a motion must be 27 served and filed not more than 14 days after the motion is served and filed” and that “[a]ny reply 28 to an opposition must be served and filed by the moving party not more than 7 days after the SVI-95020v1 STIPULATED REQUEST AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE Case No. C-09-03689-JF-RS 1 2 opposition is served and filed.” On July 1, 2011, ChipMOS served on Freescale a Motion for Summary Judgment, noticed 3 for hearing on August 12, 2011. Under Civil Local Rule 7-3, Freescale’s opposition brief to 4 ChipMOS’s Motion for Summary Judgment would be due on July 15, and ChipMOS’s reply brief 5 would be due on July 22. See Civ. L.R. 7-3. The Parties have agreed amongst themselves, 6 subject to the Court’s approval, to permit (1) Freescale to file its opposition brief on July 22 and 7 (2) ChipMOS to file its reply brief on July 29. 8 9 Given the Parties’ agreement on the proposed schedule, the Parties request that the Court set the briefing schedule for ChipMOS’s Motion for Summary Judgment as follows: 10 July 22 Deadline to File Opposition Brief 11 July 29 Deadline to File Reply Brief 12 August 12 Hearing 13 This extended briefing schedule would not affect the currently noticed hearing date of August 12, 14 2011 and would have no other effect on the current case schedule. 1 15 16 17 18 This request for an extension is supported by the Declaration of Jacqueline K. S. Lee, filed concurrently herewith. IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated: July 1, 2011 JONES DAY 19 20 By: /s/ Jacqueline K. S. Lee Jacqueline K. S. Lee 21 Counsel for Plaintiff FREESCALE SEMICONDUCTOR, INC. 22 23 In accordance with General Order No. 45, Section X(B), the above signatory attests that 24 Concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the signatory below. 25 26 1 27 28 Under the Parties’ proposed extended briefing schedule, the deadlines to file opposition and reply briefs in connection with ChipMOS’s Motion for Summary Judgment will occur before, and thus will not affect, the deadlines to file responses and replies in connection with dispositive motions set forth in the Joint Schedule Order. See ECF No. 72. SVI-95020v1 -1- STIPULATED REQUEST AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE Case No. C-09-03689-JF-RS 1 Dated: July 1, 2011 COOLEY LLP 2 3 By: /s/ Shanee Y. W. Nelson Shanee Y. W. Nelson 4 Counsel for Defendant CHIPMOS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 9 10 11 7/14/2011 DATED: ________________________ By: Hon. Jeremy Fogel 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SVI-95020v1 -2- STIPULATED REQUEST AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE Case No. C-09-03689-JF-RS

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?