Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-07804/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-07804-0/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

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO DISMISS 

KIRK. J. ANDERSON (SBN 289043)

kanderson@budolaw.com

BUDO LAW, P.C.

5610 Ward Rd., Suite #300

Arvada, CO 80002

(720) 225-9440 (Phone)

(720) 225-9331 (Fax)

Attorneys for Plaintiff Stormborn Technologies, LLC.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

STORMBORN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,

Plaintiff, 

v.

TOPCON POSITIONING SYSTEMS, 

INC.,

Defendant. 

CASE NO.: 3:19-cv-07804-WHO 

JOINT STIPULATION AND 

ORDER FOR EXTENSION 

OF TIME TO RESPOND TO 

MOTION TO DISMISS 

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

Case 3:19-cv-07804-WHO Document 26 Filed 01/15/20 Page 1 of 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

1 

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO DISMISS 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiff Stormborn Technologies, 

LLC and Defendant Topcon Positioning Systems, Inc. (collectively the “Parties”), by 

and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS, Defendant filed its Motion to Dismiss (“Motion”) on December 31, 

2019 (Docket No. 16), and a hearing on the Motion is set for February 5, 2020;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s response to the Motion was originally due by January 

14, 2020, and Defendant’s reply was due by January 21, 2020;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff requests additional time to respond to the Motion to allow

counsel sufficient time to address the Motion that seeks to invalidate all claims in the 

asserted patent;

WHEREAS, no party will be prejudiced by this extension; 

WHEREAS, this is Plaintiff’s first request for an extension of time in connection 

with this Motion;

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, by and through the undersigned counsel, 

hereby request that the Court extend Plaintiff’s time to respond to the Motion to 

Dismiss from January 14, 2020 to January 21, 2020, and Defendant’s time to reply 

from January 21, 2020 to February 4, 2020. 

FURTHER, the Parties request that the hearing currently scheduled for February 

5, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. be continued to March 4, 2020 at 2:00 p.m.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Case 3:19-cv-07804-WHO Document 26 Filed 01/15/20 Page 2 of 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

2 

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO DISMISS 

Dated: January 14, 2020

OF COUNSEL: 

Howard L. Wernow 

(pro hac vice forthcoming) 

SAND, SEBOLT & WERNOW 

CO., LPA

Aegis Tower - Suite 1100

4940 Munson Street, N. W.

Canton, Ohio 44718

Phone: 330-244-1174

Fax: 330-244-1173

howard.wernow@sswip.com

Respectfully submitted,

/s/Kirk J. Anderson

KIRK. J. ANDERSON (SBN 289043) 

kanderson@budolaw.com 

BUDO LAW, P.C.

5610 Ward Rd., Suite #300 

Arvada, CO 80002 

(720) 225-9440 (Phone)

(720) 225-9331 (Fax)

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 

Neil J. McNabnay, pending pro hac vice /s/Rodeen Talebi

Texas Bar No. 24002583 RODEEN TALEBI (SBN 320392)

mcnabnay@fr.com FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

Ricardo J. Bonilla, pending pro hac vice 500 Arguello Street, Suite 500

Texas Bar No. 24082704 Redwood City, CA 94063

rbonilla@fr.com (650) 839-5070 (Phone)

Michael A. Vincent, pending pro hac vice (650) 839-5071 (Fax)

Texas Bar No. 24105738 

vincent@fr.com

FISH & RICHARDSON, P.C. ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

1717 Main Street, Suite 5000 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

Telephone: (214) 747-5070 

Facsimile: (214) 747-2091

Case 3:19-cv-07804-WHO Document 26 Filed 01/15/20 Page 3 of 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

3 

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO DISMISS 

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 

Honorable Judge William H. Orrick

United States District Court Judge

January 15, 2020

Case 3:19-cv-07804-WHO Document 26 Filed 01/15/20 Page 4 of 4