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.

4 CLARK PERMAR v. MAGISTRATE TO RESOLVE 6 DISPUTE RE: TERMS OF SPECTRA WATERMAKERS

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 Northern District of California


November 30, 2010

4 CLARK PERMAR,
5 PLAINTIFF,
v.
MAGISTRATE TO RESOLVE 6 DISPUTE RE: TERMS OF SPECTRA WATERMAKERS, INC., SETTLEMENT
7 DEFENDANT. 8

The opinion of the court was delivered by: 28 Maria-Elena James Chief United States Magistrate Judge

3

9 This matter came before the Court on the parties' Stipulation For Magistrate to Resolve 10 Dispute Re: Terms of Settlement filed May 19, 2010. (Dkt. #61.) Following a hearing on June 3, 11 2010, a further dispute arose as to the sale of the '198 Patent to Defendant Spectra Watermarks by 12 Plaintiff Clark Permar. Specifically, Plaintiff did not desire to sell the '198 Patent, but he agreed to

ORDER ON STIPULATION FOR

For the Northern District of California

For the Northern District of California

For the Northern District of California

COURT

COURT OURT 13 grant a royalty fee exclusive license to Spectra in lieu of an actual sale of the '198 Patent. Spectra CCC ISTRICT ISTRICT ISTRICT

D

TATES TATES

TATES 17 to consider which form of settlement and order conforms to the terms of the stipulation of June 3, S SS

NITED NITED NITED

14 rejected Plaintiff's proposal. 15 In order to resolve this matter without further hearing, the parties have each drafted a DD 16 proposed Stipulation For Dismissal and Order Thereon, and have submitted them to the undersigned 18 2010. After considering the respective contentions of the parties, and good cause having been 19 shown, 20 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Stipulation For Dismissal and Order Thereon submitted 21 by Defendant Spectra Watermakers, Inc., requiring Plaintiff to transfer the '198 Patent to Spectra, is 22 adopted and approved by the Court in order to resolve the dispute between the parties and to finalize 23 the terms of settlement in this matter. The parties are to submit a Stipulation and Order to Judge 24 Armstrong for approval and dismissal of this action within 10 days of the entry of this order. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 27

Dated: November 30, 2010

U U U

20101130

© 1992-2010 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.