Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_10-cv-00424/USCOURTS-cand-5_10-cv-00424-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

OHS West:260944899.2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE BRIEFING

SCHEDULE, CASE NO. 10-CV-00424 JF (PVT)

JEFFREY A. MILLER (SBN 160602)

jmiller@orrick.com

MATTHEW J. HULT (SBN 197137)

matthult@orrick.com

MONTE M.F. COOPER (SBN 196746)

mcooper@orrick.com

SIDDHARTHA M. VENKATESAN (SBN 245008)

svenkatesan@orrick.com

ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP

1000 Marsh Road

Menlo Park, CA 94025

Telephone: (650) 614-7400

Facsimile: (650) 614-7401

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UPEK, Inc.

ERIC J. AMDURSKY (SBN 180288)

eamdursky@omm.com

JUSTIN D. WALKER (SBN 252268)

jwalker@omm.com

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

2765 Sand Hill Road

Menlo Park, CA 94025

Telephone: (650) 473-2600

Facsimile: (650) 473-2601

DAVID S. ALMELING (SBN 235449)

dalmeling@omm.com

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94111

Telephone: (415) 984-8700

Facsimile: (415) 984-8701

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UPEK, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

UPEK, INC., a Delaware corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

AUTHENTEC, INC., a Delaware corporation,

Defendant.

CASE NO. 10-cv-00424 JF (PVT)

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE

AUTHENTEC, INC., a Delaware corporation,

Counter-claimant,

v.

UPEK, INC., a Delaware corporation,

Counter-defendant.

------------------

Case 5:10-cv-00424-JF Document 158 Filed 07/19/10 Page 1 of 2
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

OHS West:260944899.2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE BRIEFING

SCHEDULE, CASE NO. 10-CV-00424 JF (PVT)

- 1 -

After the June 25, 2010 hearing, the parties met and conferred further concerning UPEK's

proposed motion to amend its Complaint and while no compromise was reached, the parties did

agree to a briefing schedule to expedite consideration of UPEK's motion. Accordingly, the

parties respectfully submit the following proposed briefing schedule and proposed order:

EVENT DEADLINE

UPEK files Motion for Leave to Amend June 30, 2010

AuthenTec files any Opposition to

UPEK’s Motion

July 8, 2010

UPEK files any Reply July 15, 2010

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: July 1, 2010 ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP

/s/ Matthew J. Hult /s/

Matthew J. Hult

Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant

UPEK, INC.

Dated: July 1, 2010 HOWREY LLP

/s/ Denise De Mory /s/

Denise De Mory

Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff

AUTHENTEC, INC.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: , 2010

Honorable Jeremy Fogel

United States District Court Judge

Northern District of California

7/2

Case 5:10-cv-00424-JF Document 158 Filed 07/19/10 Page 2 of 2