Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Riverbed Technology, Inc. v. Quantum Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION


June 19, 2008

RIVERBED TECHNOLOGY, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, COUNTERCLAIMANT,
v.
QUANTUM CORPORATION, COUNTERDEFENDANT.
QUANTUM CORPORATION, A DELAWARE CORPORATION, COUNTERCLAIMANT,
v.
RIVERBED TECHNOLOGY, INC. A DELAWARE CORPORATION, COUNTERDEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable William H. Alsup United States District Judge

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER COORDINATING BRIEFING AND HEARINGS ON THE PARTIES' PENDING MOTIONS [Civil L.R. 6-2]

Complaint

Filed: August 14, 2007

Trial Date: March 30, 2009

coordinate the briefing and hearings on their respective pending motions as set forth below:

On November 1, 2007, this Court issued an order based on a stipulation of the parties continuing the Initial Case Management Conference in this action from November 15 to November

On December 14, 2007, this Court issued an order based on a stipulation of the parties extending certain deadlines relating to the service of the parties' preliminary infringement and invalidity contentions. (Docket No. 34.)

parties extending the deadline for the parties to exchange preliminary claim constructions and evidence. (Docket No. 80.)

consolidating this case with a related case transferred to this District from the District of Delaware and setting a new comprehensive claim construction, pre-trial, and trial schedule.

(Docket No. 92.)

extending Quantum's deadline to answer or otherwise respond to Riverbed's declaratory judgment 19 counterclaims by one week, from April 14, 2008 to April 21, 2008. (Docket No. 103.)

On May 29, 2008, Riverbed filed a Motion for Summary Judgment of various claims of its asserted '249 patent (Docket No. 109) (Riverbed's "MSJ of Validity"), setting the hearing on its 23 motion for July 3. Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-3, Quantum's Opposition was due on June 12, 2008, and

On June 12, 2008, Quantum filed a Motion For Leave to Amend Its Preliminary

STIPULATION

The parties, by and through their respective counsel of record, stipulate and agree to

A. Prior Time Modifications

29. (Docket No. 19.)

On February 15, 2008, this Court issued an order pursuant to a request from the

On March 4, 2008, this Court issued an order based on a stipulation of the parties

On April 15, 2008, this Court issued an order based on a stipulation of the parties

B. The Parties' Separate But Related Motions (Docket Nos. 109 and 123)

Riverbed's Reply is due on June 19.

Invalidity Contentions (Docket No. 123) (Quantum's "Motion to Amend") that doubled as its Opposition to Riverbed's MSJ of Validity, setting the hearing on Quantum's Motion to Amend for July 17. Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-3, Riverbed's Opposition would otherwise be due on June 26, 2008 and Quantum's Reply would be due on July 3. However, on June 17, 2008, the Court issued an order (Docket No. 137) setting Riverbed's deadline to file an Opposition to Quantum's Motion to Amend for June 19 at noon and Quantum's deadline to file a Reply for June 23 at noon. The Court issued its 5 sua sponte order at the time the parties were working out an agreement between themselves regarding the coordination of the briefing and hearing schedules on these motions.

For the reasons further articulated below, the parties stipulate and agree, and request the Court order, that the hearing date for both Riverbed's MSJ of Validity (Docket No. 109) and

Riverbed's deadline to file an Opposition to Quantum's Motion to Amend and Reply regarding its own MSJ of Validity shall be July 3, 2008. Quantum's deadline to file a Reply regarding its own

D. Reasons for Requested Change in Schedule

from one of Quantum's outside attorneys, David E. Heisey (Docket No. 125), attesting to certain facts relevant to Quantum's Motion to Amend, including facts regarding Mr. Heisey's interaction with one of Quantum's experts, Dr. David Mazieres. On June 16, 2008, Riverbed served deposition notices to take the depositions of Dr. Mazieres and Mr. Heisey relating to the assertions made in Mr. Heisey's declaration. Riverbed has represented it desires to take these depositions in advance of the preparation of its Reply regarding its MSJ of Validity and Opposition regarding Quantum's Motion to Amend.

shall take place at Quantum's counselTMs San Francisco office beginning at 10:00 a.m. on June 24, 2008, and that the deposition of David E. Heisey shall take place at Quantum's counsel's Del Mar Heights office beginning at 10:00 a.m. on June 27, 2008. These dates, times, and locations were selected in view of the availability of the witnesses.

C. Proposed Changes to Briefing and Hearing Schedule Regarding the Parties' Motions

Quantum's Motion to Amend (Docket No. 123) shall be July 17, 2008 at 8:00 a.m. Further, Motion to Amend shall be July 10, 2008.

When Quantum filed its Motion to Amend on June 12, 2008, it included a declaration The parties met and conferred and agreed that the deposition of Dr. David Mazieres and hearing schedule set forth above on their separate but related motions. It seems reasonable to the parties that Riverbed's briefing following the June 27, 2008 deposition of Mr. Heisey be due on July 3, that Quantum's responsive briefing then be due on July 10, and that the hearing on both 5 motions be set for July 17.

Court was at that time aware that the above-mentioned depositions were going forward.

The parties therefore stipulate and respectfully request that the Court coordinate the Based on these deposition dates, the parties have agreed to the coordinated briefing The parties believe that the Court may have issued yesterday's Order (Docket No. 137) for the purpose of arranging the briefing schedule on these motions, but do not believe the briefing and hearing schedule on Riverbed's MSJ of Validity and Quantum's Motion to Amend as set forth above in view of the depositions that are taking place next week and in order to promote efficiency and judicial economy.

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

By his signature below, counsel for Quantum attests that counsel for Riverbed whose electronic signature is provided has concurred in this filing.

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Honorable William United States District

20080619

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.