Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00162/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00162-133/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Patent Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

NICHIA CORPORATION, No. C-06-00162 MMC (JCS)

Plaintiff(s),

ORDER RE MOTION TO COMPEL

v. [Docket Nos. 987, 1006]

SEOUL SEMICONDUCTOR, LTD., 

ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

___________________________________/

The parties filed a joint letter on February 19, 2008 (the “Motion”) [Docket No. 987] and a

supplemental letter on February 25, 2008 [Docket No. 1006]. In the Motion, Defendant Seoul

Semiconductor seeks all invoices, bills, and billing statements reflecting attorneys’ fees and costs

charged or incurred representing Plaintiff, Nichia Corporation, in this action. Plaintiff previously

sought this exact information for fees and costs charged by Defendant’s counsel.

Plaintiff’s argument that it will produce all “relevant” invoices on February 21 when it files

its motion is not responsive. It has not agreed to produce all of the information sought by the

subpoena to its counsel or requested in the request for production. All such records, including

records regarding fees and costs incurred but for which Plaintiff has decided not to seek a fee award,

are relevant to determination of a reasonable fee award in this case. 

Plaintiff’s lack of cooperation in this matter is particularly disturbing to the Court. Plaintiff’s

counsel may or may not have been properly served with the subpoena, but Plaintiff and its counsel

knew of the subpoena before the time for production. Plaintiff itself was the subject of a request for

production that was due at a later time. By these efforts, Defendant sought to have the billing

Case 3:06-cv-00162-MMC Document 1007 Filed 02/26/08 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

records produced before the motion for fees was filed – just like the order Plaintiff sought regarding

Defendant’s attorneys’ fee bills. Plaintiff should have turned over the fee records immediately upon

learning that they were requested, and surely has no excuse for not agreeing to produce all fee

records sought by the requests. Rather than do so, Plaintiff stood on the technical lack of service,

and asserted the position that it would only produce the invoices for which it sought an attorneys’

fee award. (Motion at 6.) 

Leaving aside the subpoena, Plaintiff does not dispute that the request for production was

served on Plaintiff. Accordingly, Plaintiff and its counsel are ORDERED to produce, within 24

hours of the filing of this Order, all invoices, bills, and billing statements reflecting any and all

attorneys’ fees and costs charged or incurred representing Plaintiff in this action. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 25, 2008

___________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-00162-MMC Document 1007 Filed 02/26/08 Page 2 of 2