Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

In re Koninklijke Philips Patent Litigation, 4:18-cv-01885-HSG-EDL. (2019)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20190502f23 Visitors: 7
Filed: May 01, 2019
Latest Update: May 01, 2019
Summary: JOINT MOTION OF PHILIPS AND ACER FOR STAY PENDING COMPLETION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT; ORDER HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. , District Judge . Plaintiffs Koninklijke Philips N.V. and U.S. Philips Corporation (collectively, "Philips") and Defendants Acer Inc. and Acer America Corporation (collectively, "Acer") hereby respectfully and jointly move to stay this action for sixty (60) calendar days solely as it pertains to the disputes between Philips and Acer, in order to allow for completion of a form
More

JOINT MOTION OF PHILIPS AND ACER FOR STAY PENDING COMPLETION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT; ORDER

Plaintiffs Koninklijke Philips N.V. and U.S. Philips Corporation (collectively, "Philips") and Defendants Acer Inc. and Acer America Corporation (collectively, "Acer") hereby respectfully and jointly move to stay this action for sixty (60) calendar days solely as it pertains to the disputes between Philips and Acer, in order to allow for completion of a formal settlement agreement between those parties.

It is well-settled that a district court has discretionary power to stay proceedings in its own court. See Lockyer v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1109 (9th Cir. 2005) (citing Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936)). Here, the parties believe that a stay of proceedings is appropriate to avoid potentially unnecessary further litigation and to conserve judicial resources.

Specifically, as Philips and Acer explained in their previously-filed Stipulated Request to Extend Deadline for Opening Expert Reports (Dkt. No. 635), which the Court granted on April 12, 2019 (Dkt. No. 640), Philips and Acer have been involved in extensive settlement negotiations for the past several weeks and believe in good faith that they have reached a settlement on the primary terms in dispute. The parties have been diligently working toward memorializing those terms and other details and believe that a 60-day stay of this action will allow the parties to focus their time, effort, and legal resources into completion of such a written settlement agreement, rather than in continuing litigation (including, but not limited to, the upcoming expert report and other pretrial deadlines in these consolidated cases).

NOW, THEREFORE, Philips and Acer hereby stipulate and respectfully request that the Court issue an order that all remaining deadlines in these consolidated cases be stayed solely as they pertain to the disputes between Philips and Acer for a period of sixty (60) calendar days from the date of entry of the Court's Order below. Should the parties for any reason fail to submit a stipulated dismissal of the claims at issue prior to that time, counsel will meet and confer and approach the Court jointly for further guidance at that time, if needed.

CIVIL L.R. 5-1(i) ATTESTATION

I, Chris Holland, hereby attest that I have been authorized by counsel for the parties listed above to execute this document on their behalf.

Dated: May 1, 2019 /s/Chris Holland Chris Holland

ORDER

Having reviewed Plaintiffs Koninklijke Philips N.V. and U.S. Philips Corporation (collectively, "Philips") and Defendants Acer Inc. and Acer America Corporation's (collectively, "Acer") Joint Motion for Stay Pending Completion of Settlement Agreement ("Motion for Stay"), and good cause being shown,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The Motion for Stay is GRANTED. All remaining deadlines solely as they pertain to the disputes between Philips and Acer are stayed for a period of sixty (60) calendar days from the date of entry of this Order.

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