Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-05116/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-05116-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

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

TWELFTH JOINT STATUS REPORT CONCERNING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS ― No. C 03-5116 VRW

Russell L. Johnson (SBN 053833)

rljohnson@sidley.com

Peter H. Kang (SBN 158101) 

pkang@sidley.com

Teague I. Donahey (SBN 197531) 

tdonahey@sidley.com 

Sidley Austin LLP 

555 California Street 

San Francisco, California 94104 

Telephone: (415) 772-1200 

Facsimile: (415) 772-7400 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

AMKOR TECHNOLOGY, INC. 

William J. Bohler (SBN 141970) 

wjbohler@comcast.net 

LAW OFFICE OF WILLIAM BOHLER 

8043 Rockford Place 

Pleasanton, California 94566 

Telephone: (650) 218-6652 

Facsimile: (925) 846-3914 

Attorneys for Defendants 

CARSEM (M) SDN BHD, CARSEM SEMICONDUCTOR SDN BHD, and CARSEM INC., 

United States District Court 

Northern District of California 

San Francisco Division 

AMKOR TECHNOLOGY, INC.,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

CARSEM (M) SDN BHD, CARSEM 

SEMICONDUCTOR SDN BHD, and 

CARSEM INC., 

Defendants. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

No. C 03-5116 VRW (filed Nov. 18, 2003)

TWELFTH JOINT STATUS REPORT 

CONCERNING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

Pursuant to the Court’s request, see Docket No. 41 (June 25, 2010), the parties hereby submit 

this Twelfth Joint Status Report Concerning Stay of Proceedings. The parties are continuing to 

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Vaughn R Walker

July 27, 2010 ... 

Case 3:03-cv-05116-WHA Document 43 Filed 07/27/10 Page 1 of 3
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

TWELFTH JOINT STATUS REPORT CONCERNING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS ― No. C 03-5116 VRW 2

litigate their dispute before the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) in the investigation 

styled In the Matter of Certain Encapsulated Integrated Circuit Devices and Products Containing 

Same, ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-501. The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) issued an Initial 

Determination (“ID”) on November 18, 2004. Thereafter, on February 1, 2005, the ITC decided to 

review the ALJ’s ID. The ITC modified the ALJ’s claim construction regarding certain terms and 

remanded the investigation back to the ALJ for further findings in light of these changes. On 

November 9, 2005, the ALJ issued a second ID. On July 1, 2009, the ITC again remanded this 

investigation to the ALJ. A further evidentiary hearing was held before the ALJ on September 10 

and 11, 2009, and a third ID was issued on October 30, 2009. On December 16, 2009, the ITC 

determined that it would review the third ID in its entirety and requested additional briefing from the 

parties. On February 18, 2010, the ITC reversed the third ID and remanded this investigation to the 

ALJ to make findings on the issues of anticipation and obviousness in light of prior art 

determinations by the Commission. On March 22, 2010, the ALJ issued a fourth ID, which is under 

review by the Commission. The target date for completion of this investigation is July 20, 2010. 

Therefore, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1659, the parties respectfully request that the Stay Order 

remain in effect until the determination of the Commission in the ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-501 becomes 

final, including any appeals pursuant to the decision in In re Princo Corp., 478 F.3d 1345, reh. den., 

486 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2007). 

Case 3:03-cv-05116-WHA Document 43 Filed 07/27/10 Page 2 of 3
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

TWELFTH JOINT STATUS REPORT CONCERNING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS ― No. C 03-5116 VRW 3

Pursuant to General Order 45.X.B, Plaintiff obtained concurrence in the filing of this 

document from counsel for Defendants, as listed below. 

Dated: July 15, 2010 SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP

By: /s/ Peter H. Kang

Peter H. Kang

Attorneys For Plaintiff 

Amkor Technology, Inc. 

Dated: July 15, 2010 LAW OFFICE OF WILLIAM BOHLER

By: /s/ William J. Bohler

William J. Bohler 

Attorneys For Defendants 

Carsem (M) Sdn Bhd, Carsem Semiconductor 

Sdn Bhd, and Carsem Inc. 

Case 3:03-cv-05116-WHA Document 43 Filed 07/27/10 Page 3 of 3