Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-01268/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-01268-40/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 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: 

EVIDENTIARY EXCLUSIONS Case No. CV-04-01268 VRW

C:\DESKTOP\TSMC STIPULATION AND ORDER.DOC 787827v1/008734 

[Counsel Listed Below] 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO 

UniRAM TECHNOLOGY, INC., a California 

corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

MONOLITHIC SYSTEM TECHNOLOGY, a 

Delaware corporation; TAIWAN 

SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING 

COMPANY LTD., a Taiwan corporation, and 

TSMC NORTH AMERICA, a California 

corporation, 

Defendants. 

Case No. CV 04-01268-VRW 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER RE: EVIDENTIARY 

EXCLUSIONS 

STIPULATED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: 

EVIDENTIARY EXCLUSIONS

WHEREAS plaintiff UniRAM Technology, Inc. (“UniRAM”), and defendants 

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd. and TSMC North America (collectively 

“TSMC”) have met and conferred in an effort to streamline issues for trial and reduce the number 

of in limine requests filed in this case; 

Case 3:04-cv-01268-VRW Document 456 Filed 08/24/2007 Page 1 of 4 Case 3:04-cv-01268-VRW Document 471 Filed 08/28/07 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 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: 

EVIDENTIARY EXCLUSIONS 2 Case No CV 04-01268 VRW 

787827v1/008734 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED THAT, UniRAM and TSMC jointly move for and 

stipulate to entry of an order as follows: 

1. UniRAM will not raise allegations or offer evidence or testimony that any 

individual employed by or affiliated with TSMC delayed fabrication of UniRAM designs for 

purposes of securing an improper payment from, or investment opportunity in, UniRAM. 

2. UniRAM will not present evidence or testimony of damages arising from 

revenues earned by TSMC on the sale of TSMC parts numbers TMT292 and TMR724. 

3. Neither party will raise allegations or offer evidence or testimony or 

comment from counsel that it has been injured by or incurred litigation expenses or distraction 

arising from this case, or that the opposing party has engaged in excessive litigation practices 

such as the number of deposition days or the number of motions. 

4. Neither party will raise allegations or offer evidence or comment from 

counsel regarding requests for in limine rulings, or the Court’s decision on those requests. 

However, proper objections may be raised based on any limine orders issued by the Court, and 

the Court’s limitations may be referenced as appropriate. 

5. Neither party will raise allegations or offer evidence or comment from 

counsel or any reference whatsoever regarding the presence in the courtroom of any persons other 

than: witnesses, counsel, corporate representatives, and court personnel. This prohibition 

includes but is not limited to jury consultants. 

6. Neither party may comment or offer testimony that constitutes a direct or 

indirect comment on the law firm or lawyers representing any party including, without limitation, 

references to the size of the law firm, the geographic location of the law firm’s offices, other 

matters handled by the law firm, or other clients or types of clients represented by the law firm or 

Case 3:04-cv-01268-VRW Document 456 Filed 08/24/2007 Page 2 of 4 Case 3:04-cv-01268-VRW Document 471 Filed 08/28/07 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 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: 

EVIDENTIARY EXCLUSIONS 3 Case No CV 04-01268 VRW 

787827v1/008734 

lawyers representing any party. This also includes the nature of any party’s fee arrangement with 

its counsel. 

The immediately undersigned counsel attests that the contents of this document are 

acceptable to all persons required to sign the document. 

Dated: August 24, 2007 By: s/ John M. Neukom 

Max L. Tribble (admitted pro hac vice) 

Joseph S. Grinstein (admitted pro hac vice) 

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P 

1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100 

Houston, Texas 77002-5096 

Telephone:(713) 651-9366 

Facsimile: (713) 654-6666 

John M. Neukom (admitted pro hac vice) 

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. 

1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 

Seattle, Washington 98101 

Telephone: (206) 516-3880 

Facsimile: (206) 516-3883 

Michael F. Heim (admitted pro hac vice) 

Russell A. Chorush (admitted pro hac vice) 

Robert Tuttle (admitted pro hac vice) 

HEIM, PAYNE & CHORUSH 

600 Travis Street, Suite 6710 

Houston, Texas 77002 

Telephone: (713) 221-2000 

Facsimile: (713) 221-2021 

Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counterdefendant 

UniRAM TECHNOLOGY, INC. 

Case 3:04-cv-01268-VRW Document 456 Filed 08/24/2007 Page 3 of 4 Case 3:04-cv-01268-VRW Document 471 Filed 08/28/07 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 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: 

EVIDENTIARY EXCLUSIONS 4 Case No CV 04-01268 VRW 

787827v1/008734 

Dated: August 24, 2007 By: s/Edward R. Reines 

Edward R. Reines (State Bar No. 135960) 

Paul T. Ehrlich (State Bar No. 228543) 

Brandon D. Conard (State Bar No. 234824) 

WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES L.L.P. 

Silicon Valley Office 

201 Redwood Shores Parkway 

Redwood Shores, California 94065 

Telephone: (650) 802-3000 

Facsimilie: (650) 802-3100 

Attorneys for Defendants/Couterplaintiffs 

TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR 

MANUFACTURING COMPANY, LTD, and 

TSMC NORTH AMERICA 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED: 

Dated: ____________, 2007 By:_______________________________ 

 Honorable Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker 

 United States District Judge 

Case 3:04-cv-01268-VRW Document 456 Filed 08/24/2007 Page 4 of 4

Aug. 28

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Vaughn R Walker

Case 3:04-cv-01268-VRW Document 471 Filed 08/28/07 Page 4 of 4