MedioStream Inc v. Microsoft Corporation

Filing 610

Administrative Motion to Consider Wheter Cases Should be Related (10CV5762RS and 10CV5410RS) ( filed by MedioStream Inc. (Attachments: # 1 (Proposed)Order) (Cooper, Byron) (Filed on 6/23/2011) Text modified on 6/24/2011 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 06/23/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Byron Cooper (State Bar No. 166578)
530 Lytton Avenue, Suite 200
Palo Alto, California 94301
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Stephen D. Susman (pro hac vice)
Max L. Tribble Jr. (pro hac vice)
Joseph S. Grinstein (pro hac vice)
SUSMAN GODFREY LLP
1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100
Houston, TX 77002
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

9
10
11
12
13
14

S. Calvin Capshaw (pro hac vice)
Elizabeth L. DeRieux (pro hac vice)
CAPSHAW DeRIEUX, LLP
114 E. Commerce Ave.
Gladewater, TX 75647
Tel: [phone]; Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
MEDIOSTREAM, INC.

15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17
18

MEDIOSTREAM, INC.,

19
20

Plaintiff,
v.

21
22
23

Case No. 5:11‐cv‐02525 HRL
[PROPOSED] ORDER
REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION TO CONSIDER
WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE
RELATED (L.R. 3-12, 7-11)

MICROSOFT CORP. et. al.,
Defendants.

24
25
26
27
28

WHEREAS, plaintiff MedioStream, Inc. has filed an administrative motion to consider
[PROPOSED] ORDER

Case No. 5:11‐cv‐02525 HRL

1

whether the cases of MedioStream Inc. v. Acer, Inc., No. 3:10‐cv‐05762‐RS (N.D. Cal.) and Sony

2

Electronics, Inc. v. MedioStream, Inc., No. 3:10‐cv‐05410‐RS (N.D. Cal.) should be related to the

3

instant case; and

4
5
6

WHEREAS, MedioStream is the patentee in all three cases and all three cases involve the
same family of patents issued from the same original application, and have the same specification.
IT IS SO ORDERED, the cases of MedioStream Inc. v. Acer, Inc., No. 3:10‐cv‐05762‐RS

7

(N.D. Cal.) and Sony Electronics, Inc. v. MedioStream, Inc., No. 3:10‐cv‐05410‐RS (N.D. Cal.) are

8

related to the instant case, and therefore the instant case should be transferred to the Honorable Judge

9

Richard Seeborg.

10
11

Date:_____________________

__________________________
Hon. Howard R. Lloyd
United States Magistrate Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER

-2-

Case No. 5:11‐cv‐02525 HRL