Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-04871/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-04871-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338 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 TO 

REPOSITION CASE

Case No. C 03-04871 JW 

IRELL & MANELLA LLP

A Registered Limited Liability

Law Partnership Including

Professional Corporations

KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP

Daralyn J. Durie (169825)

Leo L. Lam (181861)

Eugene M. Paige (202849)

710 Sansome Street

San Francisco, CA 94111-1704

Telephone: (415) 391-5400

Facsimile: (415) 397-7188

Attorneys for Plaintiff and 

Counterclaim-Defendant

PIXART IMAGING INC.

IRELL & MANELLA LLP

Morgan Chu (70446)

Samuel K. Lu (171969)

Alan J. Heinrich (212782)

Richard E. Lyon (229288)

1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900

Los Angeles, California 90067-4276

Telephone: (310) 277-1010

Facsimile: (310) 203-7199

Attorneys for Defendant and 

Counterclaim-Plaintiff

AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

PIXART IMAGING INC., 

 a Taiwanese corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

 a Delaware corporation,

Defendant.

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. C 03-04871 JW 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER TO REPOSITION AGILENT 

TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AS PLAINTIFF 

AND PIXART IMAGING INC. AS 

DEFENDANT

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge James Ware

Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 118 Filed 09/14/05 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 TO 

REPOSITION CASE

Case No. C 03-04871 JW 

IRELL & MANELLA LLP

A Registered Limited Liability

Law Partnership Including

Professional Corporations

On October 31, 2003, PixArt Imaging Inc. ("PixArt") filed a declaratory judgment action 

alleging that Agilent's U.S. Patent No. 6,433,780 (the "'780 patent") is invalid and not infringed by 

PixArt. On December 23, 2003, Agilent Technologies, Inc. ("Agilent") filed a counterclaim 

alleging that the '780 patent is infringed by PixArt. On October 22, 2004, Agilent filed amended 

counterclaims alleging that U.S. Patent No. 5,686,720 and U.S. Patent No. 5,786,804 are infringed 

by PixArt. Because Agilent is the patentee for all three patents in suit, the Court has requested 

that Agilent be repositioned as the plaintiff in this action and that the caption be changed, both for 

the sake of clarity.

Therefore, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-12 and at the request of the Court, plaintiff and 

counterclaim-defendant, PixArt, and defendant and counterclaim-plaintiff, Agilent, through their 

respective counsel, hereby stipulate to reposition the case such that Agilent will henceforth be 

deemed the plaintiff and counterclaim-defendant and PixArt will henceforth be deemed the 

defendant and counterclaim-plaintiff. In addition, the parties jointly move to change the caption of 

the instant case from: 

PIXART IMAGING INC., 

 a Taiwanese corporation,

Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant,

v.

AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

 a Delaware corporation,

Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff.

to the following proposed caption:

Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 118 Filed 09/14/05 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 TO 

REPOSITION CASE

Case No. C 03-04871 JW 

IRELL & MANELLA LLP

A Registered Limited Liability

Law Partnership Including

Professional Corporations

AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

 a Delaware corporation,

Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant,

v.

PIXART IMAGING INC., 

 a Taiwanese corporation,

Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff.

Dated: September 14, 2005 KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP

By: /s/ Eugene M. Paige

Eugene M. Paige

Attorneys for Plaintiff and 

Counterclaim-Defendant

PIXART IMAGING INC.

Dated: September 14, 2005 IRELL & MANELLA LLP

By: /s/ Richard E. Lyon

Richard E. Lyon

Attorneys for Defendant and 

Counterclaim-Plaintiff

AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 118 Filed 09/14/05 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 TO 

REPOSITION CASE

Case No. C 03-04871 JW 

IRELL & MANELLA LLP

A Registered Limited Liability

Law Partnership Including

Professional Corporations

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Agilent will 

henceforth be deemed the plaintiff and counterclaim-defendant and PixArt will henceforth be 

deemed the defendant and counterclaim-plaintiff. The caption of the instant case shall also be 

changed to: 

AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

 a Delaware corporation,

Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant,

v.

PIXART IMAGING INC., 

 a Taiwanese corporation,

Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff.

Dated: _________________, 2005

Hon. James Ware

 United States District Judge

Sept. 14 /s/ James Ware

Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 118 Filed 09/14/05 Page 4 of 4