Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05038/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05038-6/pdf.json

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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

ORANGE COUNTY

DC\3984135.1 Case Number: 3:13-cv-05038-NC

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

ENLARGING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

Ryan R. Owens (Bar No. 269370)

ryan.owens@lw.com

650 Town Center Drive, 20th Floor

Costa Mesa, California 92626-1925

Telephone: (714) 540-1235

Facsimile: (714) 755-8290

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

Lawrence J. Gotts (pro hac vice)

lawrence.gotts@lw.com

555 Eleventh Street, N.W. Suite 1000

Washington, D.C. 2004-1304

Telephone: (202) 637-2200

Facsimile: (202) 637-2201

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

S. Giri Pathmanaban (Bar No. 284802)

giri.pathmanaban@lw.com

Michelle P. Woodhouse (260669)

michelle.woodhosue@lw.com

140 Scott Drive

Menlo Park, California 94025

Telephone: (650) 328-4600

Facsimile: (650) 463-2600

Attorneys for Defendant

SEOUL SEMICONDUCTOR CO., LTD.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

ENPLAS DISPLAY DEVICE 

CORPORATION; ENPLAS TECH 

SOLUTIONS, INC.; and ENPLAS (U.S.A.), 

INC.,

Plaintiff and Counterclaim 

Defendants,

v.

SEOUL SEMICONDUCTOR CO., LTD.,

Defendant and Counterclaim 

Plaintiff.

CASE NO. 3:13-CV-05038-NC

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER ENLARGING BRIEFING 

SCHEDULE ON EDD’S MOTION TO 

AMEND TO ADD A DEFENSE OF 

INEQUITABLE CONDUCT

Case 3:13-cv-05038-NC Document 110 Filed 08/25/15 Page 1 of 4
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

ORANGE COUNTY

DC\3984135.1

2

Case Number: 3:13-cv-05038-NC

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

ENLARGING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

ON EDD’S MOTION TO AMEND

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1, 6-2, 7-12, and related rules, Defendant and 

Counterclaim Plaintiff Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd. (“SSC”) and Plaintiff and Counterclaim 

Defendants Enplas Display Device Corporation (“EDD”) respectfully request that the Court 

enter the following stipulation regarding the briefing schedule for EDD’s Motion to Amend to 

Add a Defense of Inequitable Conduct:

WHEREAS on August 13, 2015 EDD filed its Motion to Amend to Add a Defense of 

Inequitable Conduct (D.I. 107);

WHEREAS SSC’s Opposition to EDD’s Motion to Add a Defense of Inequitable 

Conduct (“SSC’s Opposition”) is currently due on August 27, 2015;

WHEREAS the parties have agreed to exchange opening expert reports on August 28, 

2015;

WHEREAS the parties have agreed to extend the time for SSC’s Opposition to 

September 2, 2015;

WHEREAS the parties have agreed to extend the time for EDD’s Reply in Support of its 

Motion to Add a Defense of Inequitable Conduct to September 10, 2015;

WHEREAS the agreed-upon extension will not affect any other deadlines in this case, 

including, but not limited to the hearing on EDD’s Motion to Add a Defense of Inequitable 

Conduct;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and among the parties hereto, through their respective 

attorneys of record, that:

SSC’s Opposition to EDD’s Motion to Add a Defense of Inequitable Conduct (“SSC’s 

Opposition”) shall be filed by September 2, 2015;

EDD’s Reply in Support of its Motion to Add a Defense of Inequitable Conduct shall be 

filed by September 10, 2015;

Prior Time Modifications

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, SSC and Enplas identify the following previous time 

modifications:

On September 22, 2014, the Court entered an Amended Case Management Scheduling 

Case 3:13-cv-05038-NC Document 110 Filed 08/25/15 Page 2 of 4
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

ORANGE COUNTY

DC\3984135.1

3

Case Number: 3:13-cv-05038-NC

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

ENLARGING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

ON EDD’S MOTION TO AMEND

Order that extended the deadlines for Enplas’s Responsive Claim Construction Brief; SSC’s 

Reply Claim Construction Brief; Case Management Conference; Claim Construction Tutorial; 

Claim Construction Hearing; Deadline for Substantial Completion of Document Production; the 

Completion of Fact and Expert discovery, Opening Expert Reports, Rebuttal Expert Reports, 

Deadline to Complete Mediation, Dispositive and Daubert Motions, Pretrial Disclosures; Pretrial 

Conference Statement; Objections pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P 26(a)(3); the Pretrial Conference 

and Trial. See D.I. 72.

On March 30, 2015, the Court entered an Amended Case Management Scheduling Order 

that extended the deadlines for the Completion of Fact and Expert Discovery, Opening Expert 

Reports, Rebuttal Expert Reports, Deadline to Complete Mediation, Dispositive and Daubert 

Motions, Pretrial Disclosures; Pretrial Conference Statement; Objections pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. 

P 26(a)(3); the Pretrial Conference and Trial. See D.I. 97.

On July 3, 2015 and again on July 13, 2015, the Court granted the parties’ Joint 

Stipulation to Extend Dates to File Motions to Compel Discovery.

This agreed-upon extension will have no effect on any subsequent deadlines in this case.

Dated: August 25, 2015 LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

By: /s/ Michelle P. Woodhouse

Michelle P. Woodhouse

Attorneys for Defendant-Counterclaim 

Plaintiff

Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd.

Pursuant to L.R. 5-1(i)(3), the above signatory attests that concurrence in the filing of this 

document has been obtained from the signatory below.

Case 3:13-cv-05038-NC Document 110 Filed 08/25/15 Page 3 of 4
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

ORANGE COUNTY

DC\3984135.1

4

Case Number: 3:13-cv-05038-NC

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

ENLARGING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

ON EDD’S MOTION TO AMEND

Dated: August 25, 2015 NAGASHIMA & HASHIMOTO 

By: /s/ Marc R. Labgold

Marc R. Labgold, Ph.D. 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Counterclaim 

Defendants 

Enplas Display Device Corporation and 

Enplas (U.S.A.), Inc. 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August ____, 2015 __________________________________

Hon. Nathanael M. Cousins

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:13-cv-05038-NC Document 110 Filed 08/25/15 Page 4 of 4