October 10, 2013
GPNE Corp., Plaintiff,
APPLE INC. Defendant. GPNE Corp., Plaintiff,
NOKIA. CORP. AND NOKIA INC., Defendant. GPNE Corp., Plaintiff,
PANTECH CO., LTD AND PANTECH WIRELESS, INC., Defendant.
GARTEISER HONEA, P.C., Randall Garteiser, (CSB No. 231821) Christopher Alan Honea, (CSB No. 232473) San Rafael, CA, BURNS& LEVINSON LLP, Alexandra Capachietti, Howard J. Surer, Paul Thomas Muniz, Zachary R. Gates, Boston, MA, NELSON BUM GARDNER CASTO, P.C., Barry J. Bumgardner, Steven W. Hartsell, Ft Worth, TX, Attorneys for Plaintiff GPNE Corp.
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C., Kelly C. Hunsaker, Enrique Duarte, Redwood City, CA, Ruffin B. Cordell, (pro hac vice) Washington, DC, Christopher O. Green, (pro hac vice) Aamir A. Kazi, (pro hac vice) Jacqueline Tio, (pro hac vice) Atlanta, GA, Benjamin C. Elacqua, (pro hac vice) Houston, TX, Attorneys for Defendant APPLE INC.
KING& SPALDING LLP, Cheryl A. Sabnis, (SBN 224323) San Francisco, California, Sanjeet Dutta, (CSB No. 203463) Redwood Shores, CA, Alexas D. Skucas, (pro hac vice) NEW York, NY, Steven T. Snyder, (pro hac vice) Charlotte, North Carolina, Attorneys for Defendants NOKIA INC. and NOKIA CORP.
GORDON & REES LLP, Gordon I. Endow, (CSB No. 99638) Lyndy Chang Stewart, (CSB: 196455) San Francisco, CA, H.C. PARK & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Alan A. Wright, (pro hac vice) Reston, VA, Attorneys for Defendants PANTECH CO. LTD. and PANTECH WIRELESS, INC.
JOINT STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE AND REPLY REGARDING GPNE CORP.'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND/SUPPLEMENT ITS INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS POST-MARKMAN NO. 91)
PAUL S. GREWAL, Magistrate Judge.
Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-1 and 6-2, Plaintiff GPNE Corp. ("GPNE") and defendants Apple Inc., Nokia Corp., Nokia Inc., Pantech Co. Ltd., and Pantech Wireless, Inc. ("Defendants"), defendants in three separately pending actions pending in this District, by and through their respective counsel, stipulate to set the time for Defendants to respond to GPNE's Motion for Leave to Amend/Supplement its Infringement Contentions Post- Markman (No. 91), as follows:
1. On September 26, 2013, GPNE filed its Motion;
2. Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-3, the due date for Defendants to file their responses is October 10, 2013, and the due date for GPNE to file its reply is October 17, 2013;
3. At the case management conference held on October 2, 2013, the Court ordered GPNE to renotice its Motion in front of Magistrate Judge Grewal;
4. On October 9, 2013, GPNE renoticed its Motion before Magistrate Judge Grewal for a hearing on November 5, 2013 at 10:00 A.M.;
5. The parties have agreed that Defendants will file an opposition pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-3 by October 15, 2013 and that GPNE will file its reply by October 25, 2013;
6. No previous extensions of time regarding this Motion have been requested or granted; and
7. This requested modification will not alter the date of any event or any deadline already fixed by Court order.
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between GPNE and Defendants that Defendants will have until October 15, 2013, to respond to GPNE's Motion and that GPNE will have until October 25, 2013, to file its reply.
Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefore;
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the other signatories listed above.