Realtek Semiconductor Corporation v. LSI Corporation et al

Filing 27

STIPULATION AND ORDER 26 Revising Briefing Schedule Regarding Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Complaint. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 9/5/12. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/5/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
DAVID E. SIPIORA (State Bar No. 124951)
1400 Wewatta Street, Suite 600
Denver, CO 80202-5556
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
ROBERT J. ARTUZ (State Bar No. 227789)
1080 Marsh Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
LSI CORPORATION and AGERE SYSTEMS LLC
REED SMITH LLP
Scott D. Baker (State Bar No. 84923)
William R. Overend (State Bar No. 180209)
James A. Daire (State Bar No. 239637)
Adrian Sue Shin (State Bar No. 256960)
101 Second Street, Suite 1800
San Francisco, CA 94105-3659
Attorneys for Plaintiff
REALTEK SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION

17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

18

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

19

SAN JOSE DIVISION

20
21

REALTEK SEMICONDUCTOR
CORPORATION,

22
23
24

Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. C 12-03451 RMW
JOINT STIPULATION AND
[] ORDER REVISING
BRIEFING SCHEDULE REGARDING
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
COMPLAINT

LSI CORPORATION, et al.,

26

Date:
Time:
Place:

October 5, 2012
9:00 AM
Courtroom 6, 4th Floor

27

Judge:

Hon. Ronald M. Whyte

25
Defendant.

28
JOINT STIPULATION AND [] ORDER REVISING BRIEFING SCHEDULE
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT
CASE NO. C 12-03451 RMW

Pursuant to Local Rules 6-1 and 6-2, Defendants LSI Corporation and Agere Systems LLC

1
2

(collectively “Defendants”) and Plaintiff Realtek Semiconductor Corporation (“Plaintiff”) hereby

3

move for an extension of the briefing deadlines for the completion of briefing in connection with

4

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Realtek Semiconductor Corporation’s Complaint.
WHEREAS the current deadline for Plaintiff’s response is August 30, 2012 and the current

5
6

deadline for Defendants’ reply is September 6, 2012.
WHEREAS the current briefing schedule for Defendant’s reply spans the Labor Day

7
8

Holiday and a vacation period for counsel in which it will be difficult to prepare and finalize an

9

adequate reply brief.
WHEREAS counsel for Defendant has offered to stipulate to the extension of deadlines for

10
11

Plaintiff’s response such that preparation of Defendants’ reply will not conflict with counsel’s

12

absence.
WHEREAS counsel for Plaintiff has agreed to extend the response deadline to

13
14

September 7, 2012 and the corresponding reply deadline to September 14, 2012.
WHEREAS the parties’ stipulation does not affect the October 5, 2012 hearing date or any

15
16

other date already fixed by Court order, and does not accelerate or extend any other time frames

17

set in the Local Rules or in the Federal Rules.

18
19

THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated between the parties that:

20

1.

Plaintiff shall file and serve its Opposition papers on September 7, 2012

21

2.

Defendants shall file and serve its Reply brief on September 14, 2012

22

///

23

///

24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION AND [] ORDER REVISING BRIEFING SCHEDULE
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT
CASE NO. C 12-03451 RMW

1

1
2

3.

The October 5, 2012 hearing date currently on calendar for the Motion to Dismiss
shall remain as scheduled.

3
4

Respectfully submitted,
Dated: August 27, 2012

5

REED SMITH LLP
By: /s/ James A. Daire
Scott D. Baker
William R. Overend
James A. Daire
Adrian Sue Shin

6
7
8

Attorneys for Plaintiff
REALTEK SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION

9
10
11

Dated: August 27, 2012

12

KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
By: /s/ Robert J. Artuz
David E. Sipiora
Robert J. Artuz

13
14

Attorneys for Defendants
LSI CORPORATION and AGERE SYSTEMS LLC

15
16
17

Attestation of Signatures

18
19

I, Robert J. Artuz, attest that the concurrence in the filing of this document has been
obtained from the other signatories, which shall serve in lieu of their signatures.

20

/s/ Robert J. Artuz

21
22

PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

23
24
25
26

Dated:_____________________
HON. RONALD M. WHYTE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

27
28
JOINT STIPULATION AND [] ORDER REVISING BRIEFING SCHEDULE
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT
CASE NO. C 12-03451 RMW

2