Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05382/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05382-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:2201 Declaratory Judgement

---

CONTINUE TO FOLLOWING PAGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DPIX LLC,

CASE NO. 14-CV-05382-JST

Plaintiff(s), 

 

v. FURTHER STIPULATION AND

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

REGARDING ADR PROCESS 

YIELDBOOST TECH, INC., 

and KYO YOUNG CHUNG

Defendant(s).

_______________________________/

Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached 

the following further stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5: 

The parties agree to participate in the following ADR process: 

Court Processes:

☐ Non-binding Arbitration (ADR L.R. 4)

☐ Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5)

☐ Mediation (ADR L.R. 6)

(Note: Parties who believe that an early settlement conference with a Magistrate Judge is 

appreciably more likely to meet their needs than any other form of ADR must participate 

in an ADR phone conference and may not file this form. They must instead file a Notice 

of Need for ADR Phone Conference. See Civil Local Rule 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5) 

Private Process:

☒ Private ADR (please identify process and provider) Mediation with 

private mediator to be determined.

The parties agree to hold the ADR session by: 

☐ the presumptive deadline (The deadline is 90 days from the date of 

the order referring the case to an ADR process unless otherwise ordered. ) 

☒ other requested deadline 60 days from date of ADR Order.

Dated: September 3, 2015 /s/Stephanie O. Sparks

Attorney for Plaintiff

Dated: September 3, 2015 /s/Matthew Prebeg

Attorney for Defendant

Case 3:14-cv-05382-JST Document 69 Filed 09/04/15 Page 1 of 3
CONTINUE TO FOLLOWING PAGE

[PROPOSED] ORDER

☐ The parties’ stipulation is adopted and IT IS SO ORDERED.

☐ The parties’ stipulation is modified as follows, and IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

________________________

UNITED STATES JUDGE

When filing this document in ECF, please be sure to use the appropriate Docket 

Event, e.g., “Stipulation and Proposed Order Selecting Mediation.”

Rev. 12/11

Page 2 of 2

XX September 4, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

 Judge Jon S. Tigar 

Case 3:14-cv-05382-JST Document 69 Filed 09/04/15 Page 2 of 3
ATTESTATION

I, Stephanie O. Sparks, am the ECF user whose User ID and Password are being 

used to file the FURTHER STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING

ADR PROCESS. In compliance with Civil L.R. 5.1(i)(3), I hereby attest that 

concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from signatory Matthew 

Prebeg.

DATED: September 3, 2015

HOGE, FENTON, JONES & APPEL, INC.

By /s/Stephanie O. Sparks

Stephanie O. Sparks

Attorneys for Plaintiff

DPIX LLC

Case 3:14-cv-05382-JST Document 69 Filed 09/04/15 Page 3 of 3