Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00162/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00162-98/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Patent Infringement

---

CASE 3:06-CV-0162-MMC (JCS) 

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER REGARDING DEADLINE FOR PARTIES’ EXCHANGE OF DEPOSITION 

DESIGNATIONS, COUNTER DESIGNATIONS AND OBJECTIONS THEREON 

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

COUNSEL LISTED ON LAST PAGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

Nichia Corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd., and Seoul 

Semiconductor, Inc., 

Defendants. 

Case No: 3:06-CV-0162-MMC (JCS) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING DEADLINE FOR 

PARTIES’ EXCHANGE OF DEPOSITION 

DESIGNATIONS, COUNTER 

DESIGNATIONS AND OBJECTIONS 

THEREON 

No Hearing Requested 

Pretrial Conference: September 4, 2007 

Judge: Maxine M. Chesney 

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

Case 3:06-cv-00162-MMC Document 740 Filed 09/04/07 Page 1 of 3
1 CASE NO. 3:06-CV-0162-MMC (JCS)

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER REGARDING DEADLINE FOR PARTIES’ EXCHANGE OF DEPOSITION 

DESIGNATIONS, COUNTER DESIGNATIONS AND OBJECTIONS THEREON 

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 Nichia Corporation (“Nichia”) and Defendants Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd., 

Seoul Semiconductor Inc., (collectively “Seoul”), file this Stipulation and Proposed Order to 

extend the time for the parties to exchange deposition designations and objections to those 

designations. The parties have completed there initial exchanges, but have not revised those 

exchanges in light of the recent Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part the respective 

motions for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 665) and the Order Construing Claims (Dkt No. 664). 

RECITALS

1. On May 2, 2007, this Court issued its Pretrial Preparation Order that specified that 

the parties accomplish certain tasks regarding preparation of the case for trial, including 

designations of certain portions of deposition transcripts in the event a witness is not available to 

testify at trial. 

2. The parties exchanged the initial designations and counter designations, but have 

not revised these designation/counter designations in light of the Court’s recent Orders. 

3. The parties have met and conferred. The parties agree, in light of the significant 

changes to the scope of the case occasioned by the Court’s recent rulings on claim construction 

and summary judgment, that they will not be prepared to exchange revised designations or 

discuss objections to such designations prior to the Pretrial Conference on September 4, 2007. 

STIPULATION

Accordingly, the parties stipulate as follows: 

1. The parties incorporate the recitals set forth above. 

2. The parties shall exchange revised deposition designations and counter 

designations, striking those designations mooted by the Court’s summary judgment ruling, with 

objections thereon on or before three business days before trial. The parties will not be adding to 

their deposition designations. 

3. The parties shall exchange (a) a list of deposition designation stricken and (b) a 

complete list of remaining deposition designations three business days before trial. 

4. The parties shall complete a meet and confer regarding the objections to such 

designations and counter designations two business days before trial. 

Case 3:06-cv-00162-MMC Document 740 Filed 09/04/07 Page 2 of 3
2 Case No. 3:06-CV-0162-MMC (JCS)

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER REGARDING DEADLINE FOR PARTIES’ EXCHANGE OF DEPOSITION 

DESIGNATIONS, COUNTER DESIGNATIONS AND OBJECTIONS THEREON 

SVCA_71811.2 

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

5. The parties shall file the objections they are unable to resolve one business day 

before trial. 

DATED: August 31, 2007 Bingham McCutchen LLP 

By: /s/ 

 Beth H. Parker 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

DATED: August 31, 2007 Foley & Lardner LLP 

By: /s/ 

 Nancy Geenen 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 

 Maxine M. Chesney, 

 Judge, United States District Court 

September 4, 2007

Case 3:06-cv-00162-MMC Document 740 Filed 09/04/07 Page 3 of 3