Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03933/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03933-3/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

CASE NO. 3:14-cv-03933-JST

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

TO MODIFY CASE DEADLINES PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 6-2

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 

Robert W. Stone (CA Bar No. 163513) 

robertstone@quinnemanuel.com 

Andrew J. Bramhall (CA Bar No. 253115) 

andrewbramhall@quinnemanuel.com 

Brice C. Lynch (CA Bar No. 288567) 

bricelynch@quinnemanuel.com 

555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor 

Redwood Shores, CA 94065 

T: 650.801.5000 

F: 650.801.5100 

Attorneys for IBM CORPORATION 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

TWIN PEAKS SOFTWARE INC., 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

IBM CORPORATION, 

Defendant. 

 CASE NO. 3:14-cv-03933-JST 

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER TO MODIFY CASE DEADLINES 

PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 6-2 

Hon. Jon S. Tigar 

Case 3:14-cv-03933-JST Document 34 Filed 03/18/15 Page 1 of 6
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- CASE NO. 3:14-cv-03933-JST

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

TO MODIFY CASE DEADLINES PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 6-2

STIPULATED MOTION TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, Plaintiff Twin Peaks Software Inc. (“Twin Peaks”) and 

Defendant International Business Machines Corporation (“IBM”), by and through their respective 

counsel of record hereby stipulate and request that the Court enter an order modifying certain case 

deadlines as set forth below. In support of this request, the parties state as follows: 

WHEREAS, on January 7, 2015, the Court entered its scheduling order in this case, which 

set deadlines through the claim construction hearing on December 8, 2015. (Dkt. No. 29.); 

WHEREAS, pursuant to the scheduling order, Twin Peaks timely served its Patent Local 

Rule 3-1 Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions on February 9, 2015; 

WHEREAS, IBM believed Twin Peaks’ infringement contentions to be deficient, and sent 

a letter on February 25, 2015 to Twin Peaks to that effect; 

WHEREAS, on March 9, 2015, Twin Peaks responded in writing to IBM’s letter, served 

an Amended Disclosure of Asserted Claims, and produced additional documents to IBM pursuant 

to Patent Local Rule 3-2; 

WHEREAS, as a result of discussions between the parties regarding these matters, Twin 

Peaks and IBM have agreed to jointly request that the Court briefly extend certain deadlines 

imposed by the scheduling order, including the deadline for IBM to serve its Patent Local Rule 3-3 

Invalidity Contentions; 

WHEREAS, this is the first time the parties have sought to make any modifications to the 

Court’s scheduling order; 

WHEREAS, prior to this motion, IBM and Twin Peaks have made only one request to 

extend a deadline in this case. (Dkt. No. 10.); 

WHEREAS, the parties’ proposed extensions do not affect the dates of the technology 

tutorial and claim construction hearing, nor do they reduce the time available to the Court to 

review materials between the conclusion of claim construction briefing and the claim construction 

hearing. The proposed modifications also do not affect any deadlines for filing or lodging 

materials with the Court; 

Case 3:14-cv-03933-JST Document 34 Filed 03/18/15 Page 2 of 6
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- CASE NO. 3:14-cv-03933-JST

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

TO MODIFY CASE DEADLINES PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 6-2

WHEREAS, the parties do not believe the extension sought hereby will prejudice either 

party or result in undue delay; 

WHEREAS, counsel for IBM, Andrew J. Bramhall, has submitted a supporting declaration 

with this stipulation pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(a); 

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the forgoing, IBM and Twin Peaks by and 

through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and request that the Court modify the 

scheduling order as set forth in the following table: 

Event Scheduling Order Proposed Schedule 

Defendant’s invalidity contentions and 

accompanying document production 4/6/15 5/6/2015 

Exchange of proposed terms for 

construction 4/29/15 5/22/2015 

Exchange of preliminary claim 

constructions and extrinsic evidence 6/10/15 6/19/2015 

Joint claim construction and prehearing 

statement 7/15/15 No Change 

Claim construction discovery cut-off 8/14/15 No Change 

Claim construction opening brief 9/30/15 No Change 

Claim construction responsive brief 10/21/15 No Change

Claim construction reply brief 10/30/15 No Change

Tutorial 11/17/15 2:00 p.m. No Change

Claim construction hearing 12/8/15 1:30 p.m. No Change

Case 3:14-cv-03933-JST Document 34 Filed 03/18/15 Page 3 of 6
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- CASE NO. 3:14-cv-03933-JST

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

TO MODIFY CASE DEADLINES PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 6-2

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: March 18, 2015 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & 

SULLIVAN, LLP 

By /s/ Andrew J. Bramhall 

Andrew J. Bramhall 

Attorney for Defendant International Business 

Machines Corporation 

DATED: March 18, 2015 HAUSFELD LLP 

By /s/ Bruce J. Wecker 

Bruce J. Wecker 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Twin Peaks Software Inc..

Case 3:14-cv-03933-JST Document 34 Filed 03/18/15 Page 4 of 6
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

CASE NO. 3:14-cv-03933-JST

[PROPOSED] ORDER TO MODIFY CASE DEADLINES PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 6-2

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, the Court modifies the Scheduling Order as follows: 

Event New Deadline 

Defendant’s invalidity contentions and 

accompanying document production 5/6/2015 

Exchange of proposed terms for 

construction 5/22/2015 

Exchange of preliminary claim 

constructions and extrinsic evidence 6/19/2015 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: __________________ 2015 

By 

Honorable Jon S. Tigar 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

March 18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

 Judge Jon S. Tigar 

Case 3:14-cv-03933-JST Document 34 Filed 03/18/15 Page 5 of 6
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

CASE NO. 3:14-cv-03933-JST

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

TO MODIFY CASE DEADLINES PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 6-2

FILER’S ATTESTATION 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i) regarding signatures, I, Andrew J. Bramhall, attest that 

concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories. I 

declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing 

is true and correct. 

DATED: March 18, 2015 By /s/ Andrew J. Bramhall 

Andrew J. Bramhall 

Attorney for Defendant International Business 

Machines Corporation 

Case 3:14-cv-03933-JST Document 34 Filed 03/18/15 Page 6 of 6