San Francisco Technology, Inc. v. The Glad Products Company et al

Filing 346

ORDER APPROVING 323 JOINT STIPULATION TO SEVER DEFENDANT COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 11/16/2010. (jflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2010)

San Francisco Technology, Inc. v. The Glad Products Company et al

Doc. 346

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

David K. Callahan, P.C. (IL 6206671) [e-mail] KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 300 North LaSalle Chicago, Illinois 60654 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorney for Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company Daniel H. Fingerman MOUNT & STOELKER, P.C. 333 West San Carlos Street, Suite 1650 San Jose CA 95110 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Counsel for Plaintiff San Francisco Technology Inc.

**E-Filed 11/16/2010**

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION San Francisco Technology Inc., Plaintiff, vs. The Glad Products Company, et al. Defendants. CASE NO. 5:10-CV-00966-JF (PVT) ORDER APPROVING JOINT STIPULATION TO SEVER DEFENDANT COLGATEPALMOLIVE COMPANY

STIPULATION TO SEVER DEFENDANT COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY

CASE NO. 5:10-CV-00966-JF (PVT)

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

WHEREAS, Plaintiff San Francisco Technology Inc. ("SF Tech") filed its Complaint (D.I. 1) on March 5, 2010 (the "Complaint") alleging that numerous defendants have falsely marked articles in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 292; WHEREAS, Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company ("Colgate") filed a Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim on April 8, 2010 (D.I. 83) (the "Motion To Dismiss"); WHEREAS, on May 28, 2010, this Court entered a stipulation staying the hearing on Colgate's Motion To Dismiss and all proceedings as to Colgate and certain other defendants until the Federal Circuit entered a decision in Stauffer v. Brooks Bros., Appeal Nos. 2009-1428, 2009-1430, 2009-1453 ("Stauffer") (D.I. 189) (the "Stipulated Stay"); WHEREAS, this Court's Order Re Pending Motions on July 19, 2010 (D.I. 315) ordered that "this action is hereby severed as to each and every separate defendant" (at 21:16­18), but did not instruct the Clerk to open a new case number as to Colgate (the "July Order"); WHEREAS, the Federal Circuit entered a decision in Stauffer on August 31, 2010, and, accordingly on October 14, 2010, this Court issued an Order lifting "the stay of litigation imposed by" the July Order, in, among others, Case No. 5:10-cv-00966 San Francisco Technology Inc. v. The Glad Products Co. (D.I. 319) ("October Order"); THEREFORE, for the avoidance of doubt, the Parties, by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 1. The Complaint against Colgate will be formally severed into a separate action, and

will be assigned a new case number for the matter San Francisco Technology Inc. v. ColgatePalmolive Company. 2. 3. The October Order lifts the Stipulated Stay as to Colgate. Colgate's responsive pleadings are due no later than November 15, 2010.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 11/16/2010 Dated:_________________ By: ______________________________________ HONORABLE JEREMY FOGEL United States District Judge
JOINT STIPULATION TO SEVER DEFENDANT COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY CASE NO. 5:10-CV-00966-JF (PVT)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
JOINT STIPULATION TO SEVER DEFENDANT COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY CASE NO. 5:10-CV-00966-JF (PVT)

DATED: October 26, 2010

Respectfully submitted, /s/ Daniel H. Fingerman (with permission) Daniel H. Fingerman MOUNT & STOELKER, P.C. 333 West San Carlos Street, Suite 1650 San Jose CA 95110 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Counsel for Plaintiff San Francisco Technology Inc. /s/ David K. Callahan David K. Callahan, P.C. (IL 6206671) [e-mail] KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 300 North LaSalle Street Chicago, IL 60654 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Rachel Walsh (SBN 250568) [e-mail] KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 555 California Street, Suite 2700 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company