Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-07963/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-07963-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1051 Trademark 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SYMANTEC CORPORATION,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

LOGICAL PLUS, INC., et al.,

 Defendants.

___________________________/

No. C 06-7963 SI (WDB)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On November 9, 2007, District Judge Illston ordered the parties in this case to

participate in a follow-up settlement conference “before the end of the year.” Pursuant

to that Order, the undersigned caused to be issued a Clerk’s Notice of Further Settlement

Conference, dated November 20, 2007, which included the following orders to the parties

and their lawyers: (1) by no later than December 10, 2000, lodge with the undersigned

an updated Confidential Settlement Conference Statement and (2) through lead trial

counsel and a representative of the client who has full authority to negotiate and settle the

case, appear at the follow-up settlement conference in Courtroom 4 of the federal

courthouse in Oakland, California, on December 18, 2007. 

No defendant lodged (ever) an updated Confidential Settlement Conference

Statement. No defendant appeared at the courthouse on December 18th for the settlement

conference. No lawyer for any defendant appeared at the courthouse on December 18th

for the settlement conference. 

Case 3:06-cv-07963-SI Document 44 Filed 12/21/07 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

2

On December 17, 2007, Mr. Lo, counsel for Logical Plus and Mr. Chang,

telephoned the undersigned’s chambers to seek permission to appear at the settlement

conference by phone. Pursuant to standing order, such requests must be in writing and

must be served and filed no fewer than seven court days before the settlement conference

is to be held. No defendant and no defense lawyer timely filed any such request. 

Instead, on the morning of the scheduled settlement conference, December 18,

2007, Mr. Lo e-filed a request that “Defendants” appear at the settlement conference by

telephone. That filing includes the following paragraph: “Counsel for Defendants spoke

with counsel for plaintiff regarding this request for telephonic appearance. Plaintiff has

not objected to this request for telephonic appearance. Therefore, Defendants

respectfully request the Court grant this request for telephonic appearance.” Within a

few hours, counsel for plaintiff filed a response to defendants’ request. In that response,

plaintiff objected to defendants’ request to appear by phone and asserted that “At no time

has Symantec ever indicated to the defense that it does not object.” This assertion flatly

contradicts the impression that Mr. Lo apparently tried to create, namely, that plaintiff

did not object to defendants’ request to appear by phone. 

Given the matters described in the preceding paragraphs, the Court hereby

ORDERS Mr. Joseph Chang, Logical Plus, Inc., and Mr. Philip H. Lo, State Bar Number

178538, to appear at 1:30 p.m., on MONDAY, JANUARY 14, 2008, in Courtroom 4 of

the United States Courthouse in Oakland, California, TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THEY

SHOULD NOT BE SANCTIONED FOR (1) failing to lodge an updated Confidential

Settlement Conference Statement, (2) failing to appear in person at the settlement

conference that was duly scheduled for December 18, 2007, (3) failing to timely file a

written request to appear at the settlement conference by telephone instead of in person,

and (4) misleading the Court about whether plaintiff objected to the last-minute request

by defendants to appear by phone. 

Case 3:06-cv-07963-SI Document 44 Filed 12/21/07 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

3

The Court hereby warns Mr. Chang, Logical Plus, Inc., and Mr. Lo that failure to

appear in person on January 14, 2008, at the hearing on this Order to Show Cause will

result in imposition of substantial financial sanctions and a recommendation that, as an

additional sanction, the District Court enter judgment on Symantec’s Complaint in its

favor and against Logical Plus, Inc., and Mr. Chang (personally).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 21, 2007

 

WAYNE D. BRAZIL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-07963-SI Document 44 Filed 12/21/07 Page 3 of 3