Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-02289/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-02289-41/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 Patent Infringement

---

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-03-4669-MJJ (EMC) and CV-03-2289-MJJ (EMC) Page 1 

DSMDB-2166021v01 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

RICOH COMPANY, LTD., 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

AEROFLEX INCORPORATED, et al., 

 Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

SYNOPSYS, INC., 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

RICOH COMPANY, LTD., 

 Defendant 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

CASE NO. CV-03-4669-MJJ (EMC) 

CASE NO. CV-03-2289-MJJ (EMC) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

Pursuant to the Status Conference on October 12, 2006, Synopsys and the Aeroflex Defendants 

have elected to proceed with a hearing on their summary judgment motions 1 and 6. [Dkt. No. 568 and 

571 in 03-4669, Dkt. No. 422 and 425 in 03-2289.] Oral argument on these motions will be heard for 

one hour commencing at 9:30 a.m. on December 12, 2006. 

Based upon their decision to proceed with motions 1 and 6, the remaining motions for summary 

judgment by Synopsys and the Aeroflex Defendants are hereby deemed to be withdrawn. The 

withdrawn motions consist of motions nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 [Dkt. Nos. 570, 553, 572, 565, 554, 556, 

and 552 in 03-4669; and Dkt. Nos. 424, 415, 426 and 419 in 03-2289]. The clerk is instructed to remove 

those motions from the calendar. 

The Rule 11 motion of Synopsys and the Aeroflex defendants is denied for the reasons stated 

during the status conference. [Dkt. No. 664 in 03-4669, Dkt. No. 481 in 03-2289.] 

Defendants Aeroflex and Aeroflex Colorado, Inc, have advised the Court that they consent to an 

Case 3:03-cv-02289-MJJ Document 532 Filed 10/31/2006 Page 1 of 2
 Case 5:03-cv-02289-JW Document 535 Filed 11/02/06 Page 1 of 2
[PROPOSED] ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-03-4669-MJJ (EMC) and CV-03-2289-MJJ (EMC) Page 2 

DSMDB-2166021v01 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

entry of judgment against them on their affirmative defense of authorization and consent. The Court 

hereby grants Ricoh’s motion for summary judgment on this issue [Dkt. No. 558 in 03-4669.] The clerk 

is directed to enter a partial final judgment in Ricoh’s favor. 

SO ORDERED 

DATED: _______________________ ___________________________________ 

 The Honorable Martin J. Jenkins 

 United States District Court Judge 

Submitted by: 

DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP 

By /s/ Kenneth W. Brothers

Attorneys for Ricoh 

Case 3:03-cv-02289-MJJ Document 532 Filed 10/31/2006 Page 2 of 2

11/2/2006

Case 5:03-cv-02289-JW Document 535 Filed 11/02/06 Page 2 of 2