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.

Mformation Technologies, Inc v. Research In Motion Limited and Research In Motion Corporation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION


March 25, 2013

MFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC., PLAINTIFF,
v.
RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED AND RESEARCH IN MOTION CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Edward M. Chen U U.S. District Court Judge

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO MODIFY PROTECTIVE ORDER

The undersigned counsel for Defendants Research In Motion Limited and 24 Research In Motion Corporation (collectively, "Defendants-Appellees"), and for Plaintiff 25 Mformation Technologies, Inc. ("Mformation Technologies"), along with the undersigned 26 counsel for Mformation Software Technologies, Inc. ("Mformation Software"), hereby stipulate and agree, subject to the Court's approval, as follows:

WHEREAS, the above-captioned action is on appeal to the United States 2 Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Mformation Technologies v. Research in 3 Motion, No. 2012-1679, 2013-1123 (Fed. Cir.);

WHEREAS, Mformation Software has moved, pursuant to FRAP 43, to substitute as appellant based on its contention that it has obtained Mformation Technologies' rights in this litigation, including all right, title, and interest to the patents- in-suit and the right to sue for past infringement;

WHEREAS, Defendants-Appellees have opposed Mformation Software's motion to substitute as appellant and have moved to dismiss the appeal but, without 10 waiving their rights with respect to such motions, desire to facilitate briefing under the 11 schedule set by the Federal Circuit; 12 WHEREAS, the Protective Order in effect in this case contemplates 13 modification with this Court's approval, see Dkt. No. 51 [Stipulated Protective Order (as 14 modified by the Court)] at § 6.4; and 15 WHEREAS, this Court retains jurisdiction over the parties and over 16 collateral aspects of the above-captioned case not affecting the questions presented on 17 appeal*fn1 ;

THEREFORE, Mformation Technologies, Defendants-Appellees, and 19 Mformation Software hereby stipulate to the following: 20 1. Section 1 of the May 14, 2009 Protective Order (Dkt. No. 51) ("the 21 Protective Order") is amended to add the following as its final paragraph:

All provisions of this Order applicable to Mformation Technologies 2 and its Outside Counsel shall apply to and be binding on Mformation 3 Software and its Outside Counsel, respectively. Outside Counsel for 4 Mformation Software shall be permitted access to Protected Information 5 under this Order to the same extent and subject to the same restrictions and 6 obligations as Outside Counsel for Mformation Technologies. 7 2. The Protective Order is also amended to add the following section: 8 5.9 Effect of Modification (added by stipulation of 9 March 11, 2013)

Mformation Software shall be bound by the restrictions of 11 this Protective Order as if it were a Receiving Party with respect to 12 any Discovery Material.

3. No other changes to the May 14, 2009 Protective Order are authorized 14 hereby.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: March 11, 2013 WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP

By: /s/ Edward R. Reines

Edward R. Reines

Attorney for MFORMATION

SOFTWARE

TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

Dated: March 11, 2013 KIRKLAND AND ELLIS LLP 2 3 By: /s/ Linda S. Debruin Linda S. Debruin Attorney for Defendants RESEARCH IN MOTION 4 5 LIMITED and RESEARCH IN MOTION 6 CORPORATION Dated: March 11, 2013 FOLEY & LARNDER LLP 10 By: /s/ Justin E. Gray Justin E. Gray Attorney for Plaintiff MFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

I, Edward R. Reines, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Modify Protective Order. In compliance with General Order 45.X.B, I hereby attest that Linda S. Debruin and Justin E. Gray have concurred in this filing. Dated: March 11, 2013

WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP

By: /s/ Edward R. Reines

Edward R. Reines

ORDER ON THE FOREGOING STIPULATION

The Court, having reviewed the above stipulation and finding good cause therefor, renders this stipulation a binding ORDER of this Court.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

ES DIST T RI A CT


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.