Isys Technologies v. Google et al
Filing
54
STIPULATION re 51 MOTION to Redact 46 Transcript,,,, 45 Transcript,,,, by Isys Technologies. (Anderson, Dax)
Todd E. Zenger (5238)
Dax D. Anderson (10168)
KIRTON & McCONKIE
1800 Eagle Gate Tower
60 East South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Phone: (801) 328-3600
Fax: (801) 321-4893
Email: tzenger@kmclaw.com
Email: danderson@kmclaw.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH
ISYS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Nevada
Corporation,
Civil Action No. 2:11-CV-00507 CW
Plaintiff,
Judge Clark Waddoups
vs.
GOOGLE, INC., a Delaware Corporation;
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS USA, INC., a Delaware
Corporation; ACER AMERICA CORP., a
California Corporation; AMAZON.COM, INC., a
Delaware Corporation; and BEST BUY CO.,
INC., a Minnesota Corporation;
Defendant.
ISYS’ STIPULATION RE MOTION TO
REDACT HEARING TRANSCRIPT
[JURY TRIAL DEMANDED]
Defendants Google Inc., Acer America Corp., and Samsung Electronics America, Inc.
(erroneously sued herein as Samsung Electronics USA, Inc.) (collectively, “Defendants”) have
filed a MOTION TO REDACT HEARING TRANSCRIPT dated August 9, 2011 by which the
Defendants seek an order authorizing redaction of certain portions of the transcript from the June
14, 2011 hearing on plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction
in the above-captioned case.
Plaintiff ISYS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., by and through its counsel, hereby states that it
will not oppose the MOTION TO REDACT HEARING TRANSCRIPT dated August 9, 2011
(the “Motion to Redact”) and stipulates to the immediate entry of the [PROPOSED] ORDER
GRANTING MOTION TO REDACT HEARING TRANSCRIPT submitted by the Defendants
along with its Motion To Redact.
DATED this 11th day of August, 2011.
KIRTON & McCONKIE
By:
s/Dax D. Anderson
Todd E. Zenger
Dax D. Anderson
Attorney for Plaintiff
ISYS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
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?