Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-04414/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-04414-12/pdf.json

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

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

Case: 3:17-cv-04414-JST 

BAKER 

BOTTS L.L.P.

BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.

Kurt M. Pankratz (SBN 24013291) (Pro Hac Vice) 

kurt.pankratz@bakerbotts.com 

Chad C. Walters (SBN 24034730) (Pro Hac Vice) 

chad.walters@bakerbotts.com 

James Williams (SBN 24075284) (Pro Hac Vice) 

james.williams@bakerbotts.com 

Harrison Rich (SBN 24083730) (Pro Hac Vice) 

harrison.rich@bakerbotts.com 

Clarke Stavinoha (SBN 24093198) (Pro Hac Vice) 

clarke.stavinoha@bakerbotts.com 

Morgan Grissum (SBN 24084387) (Pro Hac Vice) 

morgan.grissum@bakerbotts.com 

Bryan D. Parrish (SBN 24089039) (Pro Hac Vice) 

bryan.parrish@bakerbotts.com 

Casey L. Shomaker (SBN 24110359) (Pro Hac Vice) 

casey.shomaker@bakerbotts.com 

2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 900 

Dallas, TX 75201 

Tel: (214) 953-6500 

Fax: (214) 953-6503 

Wayne O. Stacy (SBN 341579) 

wayne.stacy@bakerbotts.com 

101 California Street, Suite 3600 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Tel: (415) 291-6206 

Fax: (415) 291-6306 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

SYMANTEC CORPORATION AND 

SYMANTEC LIMITED 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SAN FRANCISCO 

SYMANTEC CORPORATION and 

SYMANTEC LIMITED, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

ZSCALER, INC, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 3:17-CV-04414-JST 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 

PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED 

ADMINISTRATIVE 

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A 

STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION 

Date Filed: June 22, 2017 

Trial Date: June 14, 2021 

Case 3:17-cv-04414-JST Document 193 Filed 08/01/19 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 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

Case: 3:17-cv-04414-JST 

BAKER 

BOTTS L.L.P.

The Court has reviewed Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Administrative Motion for Leave to File a 

Statement of Recent Decision (“Motion”). After consideration of the Motion, and the papers 

submitted in support of the Motion, the Court finds that a statement of recent decision is 

warranted. 

Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Administrative Motion for Leave to File a Statement of Recent 

Decision is GRANTED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 

Hon. Jon S. Tigar 

United States District Judge 

August 1, 2019

Case 3:17-cv-04414-JST Document 193 Filed 08/01/19 Page 2 of 2