Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-03378/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-03378-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

FENWICK 

&

WEST LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW

MOUNTAIN VIEW

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 ORDER RE EXPERT 

REPORTS AND DISCOVERY CUT-OFF CASE NO. C 02-3378 JSW 

LYNN H. PASAHOW (CSB No. 054283) 

 e-mail: lpasahow@fenwick.com 

J. DAVID HADDEN (CSB No. 176148) 

 e-mail: dhadden@fenwick.com 

DARREN E. DONNELLY (CSB No. 194335) 

 e-mail: ddonnelly@fenwick.com 

CAROLYN CHANG (CSB No. 217933) 

 e-mail: cchang@fenwick.com 

FENWICK & WEST LLP 

Silicon Valley Center, 801 California Street 

Mountain View, CA 94041 

Telephone: (650) 988-8500 

Facsimile: (650) 938-5200 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

INFORMATICA CORPORATION 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

INFORMATICA CORPORATION, a 

Delaware corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

BUSINESS OBJECTS DATA 

INTEGRATION, INC., formerly known as 

ACTA TECHNOLOGY, INC., a Delaware 

corporation, 

Defendant. 

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS. 

Case No. C 02-03378 JSW 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER RE EXPERT REPORTS AND 

DISCOVERY CUT-OFF 

Case 3:02-cv-03378 Document 183 Filed 03/29/2006 Page 1 of 3
 Case 3:02-cv-03378-EDL Document 186 Filed 03/30/06 Page 1 of 3
FENWICK 

&

WEST LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW

MOUNTAIN VIEW

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 

PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION 

TO SHORTEN TIME CASE NO. C 02-3378 JSW 

On December 30, 2005, Plaintiff Informatica Corporation (“Informatica”) served its 

Second Set of Interrogatories on Defendant Business Objects Data Integration (“BODI”), which 

included an interrogatory requesting BODI’s non-infringement contentions. After the parties met 

and conferred, BODI agreed to provide a response to the interrogatory that includes its noninfringement contentions by March 31, 2006. Following receipt and review of BODI’s response, 

Informatica is scheduled to depose BODI’s 30(b)(6) witnesses regarding the operation of the 

Accused Products on April 7, 2006. 

Due to the scheduling of the non-infringement contentions and the deposition of BODI, 

the parties have negotiated a revised schedule for expert reports and discovery cutoff that does not 

significantly impact the overall case schedule. The parties have agreed to extend the dates for 

expert reports and discovery cutoff by one week, while leaving the schedule for dispositive 

motions unchanged. The parties hereby respectfully request the Court adopt the schedule set 

forth below. 

In accordance with Civil Local Rule 6-2(a), attached hereto is a Declaration of Carolyn 

Chang setting forth (i) the reasons for the requested enlargement, (ii) a disclosure of all previous 

modifications in the case, and (iii) a description of the effect of the requested time modification 

on the schedule for the case. 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective 

counsel that: 

Event Date 

Parties to comply with Rule 26(a)(2)(A) (witnesses providing 

expert opinions) 

April 3, 2006 

Parties to comply with Rule 26(a)(2)(B) (expert reports) with 

respect to issues on which that party bears the burden of proof 

April 17, 2006 

Parties to comply with Rule 26(a)(2)(B) (expert reports) in 

rebuttal/opposition with respect to issues on which the other 

party bears the burden of proof 

May 10, 2006 

Discovery cutoff May 29, 2006 

Dispositive motions filed June 16, 2006 (unchanged) 

Case 3:02-cv-03378 Document 183 Filed 03/29/2006 Page 2 of 3
 Case 3:02-cv-03378-EDL Document 186 Filed 03/30/06 Page 2 of 3
FENWICK 

&

WEST LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW

MOUNTAIN VIEW

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 ORDER RE EXPERT 

REPORTS AND DISCOVERY CUT-OFF CASE NO. C 02-3378 JSW 

2

Hearing on dispositive motions August 4, 2006 (unchanged) 

Dated: March 29, 2006 Respectfully submitted 

FENWICK & WEST LLP 

By: /s/ Carolyn Chang 

Carolyn Chang 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

INFORMATICA CORPORATION 

Dated: March 29, 2006 TOWNSEND AND TOWNSEND AND CREW LLP 

By: /s/ Joseph A. Greco 

Joseph A. Greco 

Attorneys for Defendant 

BUSINESS OBJECTS DATA INTEGRATION, INC. 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: April __, 2006 

Honorable Jeffrey S. White 

United States District Court Judge 

Northern District of California 

Case 3:02-cv-03378 Document 183 Filed 03/29/2006 Page 3 of 3

March 30

Case 3:02-cv-03378-EDL Document 186 Filed 03/30/06 Page 3 of 3