Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-06222/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-06222-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 Patent Infringement

---

STIPULATION AND [ ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR 

HALO ELECTRONICS, INC. TO RESPOND TO ELEC & ELTEK (USA) 

CORPORATION AND WURTH ELECTRONICS MIDCOM, INC.’S 

ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM TO HALO’S FIRST AMENDED 

COMPLAINT (DOC. NOS. 168, 170)

Case No. 07-6222 RMW

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

Juanita Brooks (CA#75934 / brooks@fr.com)

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

12390 El Camino Real

San Diego, CA 92130

Telephone: (858) 678-5070

Facsimile: (858) 678-5099

Limin Zheng (CA #226875 / zheng@fr.com)

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

500 Arguello Street, Suite 500

Redwood City, CA 94063

Telephone: (650) 839-5070

Facsimile: (650) 839-5071

Michael J. Kane (Admitted pro hac vice / kane@fr.com)

William R. Woodford (Admitted pro hac vice / woodford@fr.com)

Michael J. Pape (Admitted pro hac vice / pape@fr.com)

John C. Adkisson (Admitted pro hac vice / adkisson@fr.com)

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

3200 RBC Plaza

60 South Sixth Street

Minneapolis, MN 55402

Telephone: (612) 335-5070

Facsimile: (612) 288-9696

Attorneys for Plaintiff

HALO ELECTRONICS, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

(SAN JOSE DIVISION)

HALO ELECTRONICS, INC.,

 Plaintiff,

v.

BEL FUSE INC., E & E MAGNETIC 

PRODUCTS LIMITED, ELEC & ELTEK (USA) 

CORPORATION, WURTH ELECTRONICS 

MIDCOM, INC., WURTH ELEKTRONIK 

GMBH & CO. KG, and XFMRS, INC.,

 Defendants

Civil Case No. 07-6222 RMW

STIPULATION AND [] 

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR HALO 

ELECTRONICS, INC. TO RESPOND TO 

ELEC & ELTEK (USA) CORPORATION 

AND WURTH ELECTRONICS MIDCOM, 

INC.’S ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM

TO HALO’S FIRST AMENDED 

COMPLAINT (DOC. NOS. 168, 170)

*E-FILED - 5/6/10*

Case 5:07-cv-06222-RMW Document 189 Filed 05/06/10 Page 1 of 5
1 STIPULATION AND [] ORDER 

EXTENDING TIME FOR HALO ELECTRONICS, INC. 

TO RESPOND TO ELEC & ELTEK (USA) 

CORPORATION AND WURTH ELECTRONICS 

MIDCOM, INC.’S ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM 

TO HALO’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. 

NOS. 168, 170)

Case No. 07-6222 RMW

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

On April 21, 2010, the Court granted Plaintiff Halo Electronics, Inc. (“Halo”) and 

Defendants Elec & Eltek (USA) Corporation (“E&E (USA)”) and Wurth Electronics Midcom, Inc. 

(“Midcom”)’s stipulation and request to extend the time for Halo to respond to E&E (USA) and 

Midcom’s respective Answers and Counterclaims to Halo’s First Amended Complaint (Doc. Nos. 

168 and 170, respectively) from April 19, 2010 until, and including May 3, 2010, to provide the 

parties an opportunity to meet and confer on Halo’s motion to strike the inequitable conduct 

allegations in E&E (USA) and Midcom’s Answers, which Halo currently intends to file with its 

Answers to E&E (USA) and Midcom’s Counterclaims. (Doc. No. 179)

The parties met and conferred telephonically on April 23, 2010. Following the meet and 

confer, counsel for E&E (USA) advised that although E&E (USA) disagrees that the affirmative 

defenses were deficient, it was willing to amend, and would be able to send counsel for Halo a 

proposed amended answer by May 11, 2010.

To allow the parties sufficient time to further meet and confer, Halo, E&E (USA), and 

Midcom, by and through their counsel, hereby stipulate and respectfully propose the following:

1. E&E (USA) and Midcom shall provide to Halo a copy of proposed Amended 

Answers no later than May 11, 2010;

2. The parties shall meet and confer regarding E&E (USA) and Midcom’s proposed 

amendment no later than May 13, 2010;

3. E&E (USA) and Midcom shall advise Halo of their decision as to whether they will 

amend their Answers no later than May 14, 2010;

4. If E&E (USA) and Midcom intend to amend their Answers, they shall do so no 

later than May 17, 2010;

5. Otherwise, Halo shall file its response to E&E (USA) and Midcom’s respective 

Answers and Counterclaims to Halo’s First Amended Complaint (Doc. Nos. 168 

and 170) no later than May 17, 2010.

Case 5:07-cv-06222-RMW Document 189 Filed 05/06/10 Page 2 of 5
STIPULATION AND [] ORDER EXTENDING TIME

FOR HALO ELECTRONICS, INC. TO RESPOND TO ELEC & 

ELTEK (USA) CORPORATION AND WURTH ELECTRONICS 

MIDCOM, INC.’S ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM TO HALO’S 

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. NOS. 168, 170)

Case No. 07-6222 RMW

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

The parties do not believe that the proposed extension of time will alter the date of any 

event or deadline already fixed by Court Order.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: May 3, 2010 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

By: /s/ Michael J. Kane

Michael J. Kane

Attorneys for Plaintiff

HALO ELECTRONICS, INC.

Dated: May 3, 2010 BAKER DONELSON BEARMAN CALDWELL 

& BERKOWITZ, P.C.

By: /s/ Michael J. Powell

Michael J. Powell

Attorneys for Defendant

ELEC & ELTEK (USA) CORPORATION

Dated: May 3, 2010 BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

By: /s/ Neal Seth

Neal Seth

Attorneys for Defendant

WURTH ELECTRONICS MIDCOM, INC.

Case 5:07-cv-06222-RMW Document 189 Filed 05/06/10 Page 3 of 5
STIPULATION AND [] ORDER EXTENDING TIME

FOR HALO ELECTRONICS, INC. TO RESPOND TO ELEC & 

ELTEK (USA) CORPORATION AND WURTH ELECTRONICS 

MIDCOM, INC.’S ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM TO HALO’S 

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. NOS. 168, 170)

Case No. 07-6222 RMW

3

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: ___________________ __________________________________

HONORABLE RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

5/6/10

Case 5:07-cv-06222-RMW Document 189 Filed 05/06/10 Page 4 of 5
STIPULATION AND [] ORDER EXTENDING TIME

FOR HALO ELECTRONICS, INC. TO RESPOND TO ELEC & 

ELTEK (USA) CORPORATION AND WURTH ELECTRONICS 

MIDCOM, INC.’S ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM TO HALO’S 

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. NOS. 168, 170)

Case No. 07-6222 RMW

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

Pursuant to the Northern District of California Electronic Filing Procedures and General 

Order No. 45, I attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the 

signatories listed above. 

Dated: May 3, 2010 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

By: /s/ Limin Zheng__________________

Limin Zheng

Attorney for Plaintiff

HALO, INC.

Case 5:07-cv-06222-RMW Document 189 Filed 05/06/10 Page 5 of 5