WI-LAN Inc. v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. et al
Filing
204
Joint MOTION for Protective Order FOR ENTRY OF STIPULATION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PROTECTIVE ORDER BETWEEN WI-LAN INC., NON-PARTY QUALCOMM INC., AND SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS AB AND SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS (USA) INC. by Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., Sony Mobile Communications AB, WI-LAN Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - STIPULATION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PROTECTIVE ORDER BETWEEN WI-LAN,INC., NON-PARTY QUALCOMM INC., SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS AB AND SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS (USA) INC.)(Pai, Ajeet)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
WI–LAN INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:10–CV–521–LED
ALCATEL–LUCENT USA INC., et al.,
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Defendants.
JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF STIPULATION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
PROTECTIVE ORDER BETWEEN WI-LAN INC., NON-PARTY QUALCOMM INC.,
AND SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS AB AND
SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS (USA) INC.
Plaintiff Wi-LAN Inc., Defendants Sony Mobile Communications AB and Sony Mobile
Communications (USA) Inc. (collectively, “Sony Mobile”), and Non-Party Qualcomm Inc. have
met and conferred, and hereby jointly move the Court to enter the Stipulation for Supplemental
Protective Order attached hereto as Exhibit A.
1
Dated: June 23, 2012
Respectfully submitted,
By:
Local Counsel
Johnny Ward
Texas State Bar No. 00794818
Wesley Hill
Texas State Bar No. 24032294
WARD & SMITH LAW FIRM
111 W. Tyler Street
Longview, TX 75601
Tel: (903) 757-6400
Fax: (903-757-2323
jw@jwfirm.com
wh@jwfirm.com
/s/ Ajeet P. Pai
David B. Weaver – LEAD ATTORNEY
Texas State Bar No. 00798576
Michael A. Valek
Texas State Bar No. 24044028
Avelyn M. Ross
Texas State Bar No. 24027817
Ajeet P. Pai
Texas State Bar No. 24060376
Syed K. Fareed
Texas State Bar No. 24065216
Jeffrey T. Han
Texas State Bar No. 24069870
Seth A. Lindner
Texas State Bar No. 24078862
VINSON & ELKINS LLP
2801 Via Fortuna, Suite 100
Austin, TX 78746
Tel: (512) 542-8400
Fax: (512) 542-8612
dweaver@velaw.com
mvalek@velaw.com
aross@velaw.com
apai@velaw.com
sfareed@velaw.com
jhan@velaw.com
slindner@velaw.com
Charles P. Ebertin
VINSON & ELKINS LLP
525 University Avenue, Suite 410
Palo Alto, CA 94301-1918
Tel: (650) 617-8400
cebertin@velaw.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Wi-LAN Inc.
By:
/s/ Richard L. Wynne, Jr.
Bruce S. Sostek (Lead Attorney)
Texas State Bar No. 18855700
Richard L. Wynne, Jr.
2
Texas State Bar No. 24003214
Matthew P. Harper
Texas State Bar No. 24037777
THOMPSON & KNIGHT LLP
1722 Routh Street, Suite 1500
Dallas, TX 75201
Tel: (214) 969-1700
Fax: (214)969-1751
Bruce.Sostek@tklaw.com
Richard.Wynne@tklaw.com
Matt.Harper@tklaw.com
Attorneys for Defendants
Sony Mobile Communications AB and
Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc.
By:
/s/ David A. Kays
David A. Kays
MORGAN FRANICH FREDKIN & MARCH
99 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 1000
San Jose, CA 95113
Tel: (408) 288-9545
Fax: (408) 288-8325
dkays@mffmlaw.com
Attorneys for Non-Party Qualcomm
Incorporated
CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
Pursuant to Local Rule CV-7(h), movant has contacted counsel for Alcatel-Lucent USA
Inc.; Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson; Ericsson Inc.; Sony Mobile Communications AB; Sony
Mobile Communications (USA) Inc.; HTC Corporation; HTC America, Inc.; and Exedea Inc.;
and no party opposes the relief requested herein.
/s/ Ajeet P. Pai
Ajeet P. Pai
3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in
compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a). As such, this document was served on all counsel who are
deemed to have consented to electronic service. Local Rule CV-5(a)(3)(A). Pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 5(d) and Local Rule CV-5(d) and (e), all other counsel of record not deemed to have
consented to electronic service were served with a true and correct copy of the foregoing by
email and/or fax, on this the 22nd day of June, 2012.
/s/ Ajeet P. Pai
Ajeet P. Pai
508322 000010 DALLAS 2880013.1
US 1459430v.1
4
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?