Lantiq North America, Inc. et al v. Ralink Technology Corporation et al

Filing 271

ORDER ORDER REGARDING JOINT MOTION FOR STAY OF THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING SETTLEMENT re 270 Joint MOTION to Stay. The Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Item No. 125) and the Motion to Dismiss (Docket Item No. 222) are TERMINATED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to being re-filed and re-noticed if necessary. Opposition due 2/22/2013 re 250 Motion for Reconsideration. Joint Preliminary Pretrial Conference Statement due by 2/25/2013. Status Conference set for 3/8/2013 10:00 AM in Courtroom 4, 5th Floor, San Jose before Hon. Edward J. Davila. Responses due by 2/22/2013. Motions terminated: 270 Joint MOTION to Stay re 268 Order on Motion to Stay pending Settlement (by all parties) filed by Media Tek USA, Inc., Media Tek Wirele ss, Inc, Media Tek, Inc, 222 MOTION to Dismiss Lantiq's Second Amended Complaint filed by Media Tek USA, Inc.,, Media Tek Wireless, Inc, Mediatek Inc. (a Taiwanese Corp.), Media Tek, Inc, 125 MOTION for Summary Judgment of Invalidity filed by Lantiq Deutschland GMBH. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 1/15/2013. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/15/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 SAN JOSE DIVISION 5 6 LANTIQ DEUTSCHLAND GMBH Case No.: 5:11-CV-00234 EJD 7 [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING JOINT MOTION FOR STAY OF THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING SETTLEMENT 8 Plaintiff, v. 9 RALINK TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 13 The Joint Motion for Stay of the Proceedings Pending Settlement by Plaintiff and Counter- 14 Defendant Lantiq Deutschland GmbH, Defendants and Counter-Claimants Ralink Technology 15 Corporation (Taiwan), Ralink Technology Corporation (California) and Defendants MediaTek, 16 Inc., MediaTek USA, Inc. and MediaTek Wireless, Inc. came before the above-captioned court. 17 After reviewing and considering the papers on file relating to this Joint Motion for Stay, the 18 arguments of counsel thereon, as well as any and all other records on file in this case, the Court 19 hereby rules as follows: 20 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED 21 1. That the Joint Motion for Stay is GRANTED. 22 2. All proceedings in this case, including all depositions, discovery requests, 23 inspections, and productions, are stayed until February 13, 2013 so that the parties can continue 24 settlement discussions, with the goal of consummating a settlement and seeking a dismissal of this 25 case; 26 3. The prior February 4, 2013 deadline set forth in the Court’s October 10, 2012 27 Order (D.I. 268) for completing all noticed depositions is extended to March 6, 2013; 28 02425.51966/5128305.1 Case No. 5:11-CV-00234 EJD -1[PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING JOINT MOTION FOR FURTHER STAY OF THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING SETTLEMENT 1 4. The deadline for Ralink to file its Opposition to Lantiq’s Motion for 2 Reconsideration of the Court’s July 17 Order (D.I. 250), which is currently due January 23, 2013, 3 will be due February 22, 2013; 4 5. In the event that the parties do not settle and the stay is lifted, the parties are to 5 submit an updated joint case management conference statement and a revised Joint Preliminary 6 Pretrial Statement on February 25, 2013; and 7 6. The further status conference currently set for February 1, 2013 (D.I. 268) is March 8 8 adjourned until _______________________, 2013.at 10:00 a.m. The Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Item No. 125) and the Motion to Dismiss 9 (Docket Item No. 222) are TERMINATED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to being re-filed and SO ORDERED. 10 IT ISre-noticed if necessary. IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 12 13 14 January 15, 2013 Dated: ________________ Honorable Edward J. Davila United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 02425.51966/5128305.1 Case No. 5:11-CV-00234 EJD -2[PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING JOINT MOTION FOR FURTHER STAY OF THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING SETTLEMENT

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?