Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Infineon Technologies AG v. Volterra Semiconductor Corporation, CV-11-6239 (MMC) (DMR). (2014)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20140905b08 Visitors: 12
Filed: Sep. 04, 2014
Latest Update: Sep. 04, 2014
Summary: STIPULATED REQUEST AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CHANGING TIME PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 6-2(a) MAXINE M. CHESNEY, Senior District Judge. Plaintiff and Counterdefendant INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG ("Infineon") and Defendant and Counterclaimant VOLTERRA SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION ("Volterra") (collectively "the Parties") have conferred by and through their counsel and pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, and subject to the Court's approval, HEREBY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, on July 17,
More

STIPULATED REQUEST AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CHANGING TIME PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 6-2(a)

MAXINE M. CHESNEY, Senior District Judge.

Plaintiff and Counterdefendant INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG ("Infineon") and Defendant and Counterclaimant VOLTERRA SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION ("Volterra") (collectively "the Parties") have conferred by and through their counsel and pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, and subject to the Court's approval, HEREBY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, on July 17, 2012, the Court entered the Parties' Stipulated Protective Order (ECF 104);

WHEREAS, the Protective Order requires each party to notify the other in advance of disclosing documents designated "Highly Confidential — Outside Counsels' Eyes Only" to an expert witness and provide the party who designated the material confidential opportunity to object;

WHEREAS, on August 22, 2014, Infineon disclosed to Volterra its intent to disclose confidential information to Mr. Peter Elenius;

WHEREAS, on August 29, 2014, Volterra objected to the disclosure;

WHEREAS, the Protective Order requires, upon unresolved objections, the party seeking to disclose confidential information to file a Motion with the Court within 5 days of the objection, seeking permission to disclose the confidential information;

WHEREAS, absent extension, Infineon's Motion, pursuant to Section 7.4(c) of the Protective Order, would be due September 3, 2014;

WHEREAS, the Parties have been negotiating additional protections that may resolve Volterra's objections to Infineon's disclosure of confidential information to Mr. Elenius;

WHEREAS, the Parties mutually agree that those discussions may be useful in an effort to prevent motion practice before the Court and mutually agree to extend Infineon's time period to move for permission to disclose pursuant to the Protective Order; and WHEREAS, set forth below are the previous time modifications in this case:

(a) Stipulation and Order regarding date by which Volterra may answer, move or otherwise plead in response to complaint extended to March 16, 2010 (ECF No. 8);

(b) Stipulation and Order Extending Response and Hearing Dates re Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend Its Infringement Contentions to Add Additional Model Numbers (ECF No. 202).

(c) Stipulation Request and Order Changing Time Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(A) (ECF No. 211).

(d) Stipulation and Order Extending Response and Hearing Dates re Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend Its Infringement Contentions to Add Additional Model Numbers (ECF No. 218).

(e) Clerk's Notice Continuing Case Management Conference (ECF No. 221)

(f) Stipulation and Order Continuing Case Management Conference (ECF No. 238).

(g) Stipulation and Order Continuing Case Management Conference (ECF No. 283).

(h) Stipulation and Order Continuing Case Management Conference (ECF No. 288).

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby propose, stipulate and agree as follows, by and through their respective counsel of record, and subject to the Court's approval, that:

1. Infineon shall have until Friday, September 5, 2014 to file an opening brief for permission to disclose Protected Material to its Expert with the Court and Volterra shall file an opposition brief three (3) days later pursuant to Section 7.4(c) of the Protective Order.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the above Stipulation, and good cause appearing therefore,

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer