Asia Vital Components Co. v. Asetek Danmark A/S, 3:16-cv-07160-JST. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20181010b01
Visitors: 7
Filed: Oct. 09, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 09, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING ACCESS TO ASETEK'S CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION BY AVC'S COUNSEL WEI LIN CHEN; [PROPOSED] ORDER JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Asia Vital Components Co., Ltd. ("AVC") and Defendant and Counterclaimant Asetek Danmark A/S ("Asetek"), through their counsel of record, jointly stipulate as follows: 1. Attorney Wei Lin Chen, who has represented that he represents AVC in this case and is a member of the Bar of this Court, may have access
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING ACCESS TO ASETEK'S CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION BY AVC'S COUNSEL WEI LIN CHEN; [PROPOSED] ORDER JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Asia Vital Components Co., Ltd. ("AVC") and Defendant and Counterclaimant Asetek Danmark A/S ("Asetek"), through their counsel of record, jointly stipulate as follows: 1. Attorney Wei Lin Chen, who has represented that he represents AVC in this case and is a member of the Bar of this Court, may have access ..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING ACCESS TO ASETEK'S CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION BY AVC'S COUNSEL WEI LIN CHEN;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
JON S. TIGAR, District Judge.
Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Asia Vital Components Co., Ltd. ("AVC") and Defendant and Counterclaimant Asetek Danmark A/S ("Asetek"), through their counsel of record, jointly stipulate as follows:
1. Attorney Wei Lin Chen, who has represented that he represents AVC in this case and is a member of the Bar of this Court, may have access to Asetek's documents and information designated as CONFIDENTIAL and HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY under the terms and restrictions for "Outside Counsel of Record" in the Northern District of California's Patent Local Rule 2-2 Interim Model Protective Order ("Operative Protective Order," found at https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/model-protective-orders) which governs this case, upon his signing and providing to Asetek's counsel his signed Agreement and Acknowledgement to Be Bound (Exhibit A to the Operative Protective Order).
2. Jennifer Tan and Melody Foo (supporting staff of Zoomlaw to Mr. Chen), upon signing and providing to Asetek's counsel with their signed Agreement and Acknowledgement to Be Bound, may similarly have access to Asetek's documents and information designated as CONFIDENTIAL and HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY under the terms and restrictions for "Outside Counsel of Record" under the Operative Protective Order. Other than Mr. Chen, Ms. Tan, and Ms. Foo, no other support staff, employee, consultant, or personnel working for, at, or employed by Zoomlaw Attorneys-At-Law ("Zoomlaw"), nor any other support staff working for or with Mr. Chen, may have any access to Asetek's documents or information designated as CONFIDENTIAL or HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY under the Operative Protective Order. Other than Mr. Wei Lin Chen, Zoomlaw attorneys who are not Outside Counsel of Record under the Operative Protective Order may not have access to Asetek's documents or information that Asetek has designated HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY under the Operative Protective Order.
3. For avoidance of doubt: 1) Mr. Wei Lin Chen, Ms. Jennifer Tan, and Ms. Melody Foo may not disclose (orally or otherwise), show, share, transfer, or provide access to Asetek's HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY documents or information to any other attorney, support staff, employee, consultant, or personnel working for, at, or employed by Zoomlaw; and 2) Mr. Wei Lin Chen, Ms. Jennifer Tan, and Ms. Melody Foo will securely store and maintain Asetek's CONFIDENTIAL and HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY documents and information so that they are not accessible to anyone else, including but not limited to any other attorney, support staff, employee, consultant, or personnel working for, at, or employed by at Zoomlaw.
[PROPOSED] ORDER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, AND FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, THE PARTIES' STIPULATION IS GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
