Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03923/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03923-28/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338 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

STIP . AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR 

MAGMA SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION

Case No. C04-03923 MMC

GEORGE A. RILEY (S.B. #118304) – griley@omm.com

MARK E. MILLER (S.B. #130200) – markmiller@omm.com

PETER OBSTLER (S.B. #171623) – pobstler@omm.com

CHRISTOPHER D. CATALANO (S.B. #208606) – ccatalano@omm.com

LUANN L. SIMMONS (S.B. #203526) – lsimmons@omm.com

NORA M. PUCKETT (pro hac vice) – npuckett@omm.com

O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP

Embarcadero Center West

275 Battery Street

San Francisco, CA 94111-3305

Telephone: (415) 984-8700

Facsimile: (415) 984-8701

Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant

MAGMA DESIGN AUTOMATION, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

SYNOPSYS, INC., a Delaware Corporation,

Plaintiff and CounterDefendant,

v.

MAGMA DESIGN AUTOMATION, INC., 

a Delaware Corporation

Defendant and 

Counterclaimant.

Case No. C04-03923 MMC

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER RE: BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON

MAGMA DESIGN AUTOMATION, 

INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT AS TO THE SECOND 

THROUGH SIXTH CAUSES OF 

ACTION IN SYNOPSYS’S SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS.

Case 3:04-cv-03923-MMC Document 519 Filed 10/31/05 Page 1 of 5
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

1

STIP . AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR 

MAGMA SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION

Case No. C04-03923 MMC

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff Synopsys, Inc. (“Synopsys”) and 

Defendant Magma Design Automation, Inc. (“Magma”) as follows:

WHEREAS, by Order dated October 14, 2005, the Court permitted the filing of an 

amended opposition and amended reply to Magma’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to the 

Second Through Sixth Causes of Action in Synopsys’s Second Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS, the Court’s October 14, 2005 Order instructed the parties to file a stipulated 

schedule for the filing of an amended opposition and amended reply to Magma’s Motion for 

Summary Judgment as to the Second Through Sixth Causes of Action in Synopsys’s Second 

Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS, the Court’s October 14, 2005 Order also instructed the parties to file a 

stipulated scheduling for the hearing of the following three motions currently pending before the 

Court: (1) Synopsys’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Establishing Unfair Competition; 

(2) Magma’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment on Synopsys’s Sixth Cause of Action (Unfair 

Competition); and (3) Magma’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to the Second Through Sixth 

Causes of Action in Synopsys’s Second Amended Complaint;

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, the parties hereby stipulate as 

follows:

Synopsys shall file and serve any amended opposition to Magma’s Motion for Summary 

Judgment as to the Second Through Sixth Causes of Action in Synopsys’s Second Amended 

Complaint on or before December 16, 2005;

Magma shall file and serve any amended reply in support of Magma’s Motion for 

Summary Judgment as to the Second Through Sixth Causes of Action in Synopsys’s Second 

Amended Complaint on or before January 13, 2006;

The hearing on the following three motions is scheduled for January 27, 2006, at 9:00 

a.m.: (1) Synopsys’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Establishing Unfair Competition; (2) 

Case 3:04-cv-03923-MMC Document 519 Filed 10/31/05 Page 2 of 5
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

STIP . AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR 

MAGMA SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION

Case No. C04-03923 MMC

Magma’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment on Synopsys’s Sixth Cause of Action (Unfair 

Competition); and (3) Magma’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to the Second Through Sixth 

Causes of Action in Synopsys’s Second Amended Complaint.

The parties reserve their rights to notice any additional motions for hearing on January 27, 

2006, or any other date, consistent with this Court’s previous orders and the local rules.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: October 28, 2005

GEORGE A. RILEY

MARK E. MILLER

PETER OBSTLER

CHRISTOPHER D. CATALANO

LUANN L. SIMMONS

NORA M. PUCKETT

O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP

By: /s/ Luann L. Simmons

Luann L. Simmons

Attorneys for Defendant and 

Counterclaimant MAGMA DESIGN 

AUTOMATION, INC.

Dated: October 28, 2005

CHRIS SCOTT GRAHAM

MICHAEL N. EDELMAN

DECHERT LLP

By: /s/ Michael Edelman

Michael Edelman

Attorneys for Plaintiff SYNOPSYS, INC.

Case 3:04-cv-03923-MMC Document 519 Filed 10/31/05 Page 3 of 5
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

STIP . AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR 

MAGMA SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION

Case No. C04-03923 MMC

I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has been 

obtained from Michael Edelman.

Dated: October 28, 2005

GEORGE A. RILEY

MARK E. MILLER

PETER OBSTLER

CHRISTOPHER D. CATALANO

LUANN L. SIMMONS

O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP

By: /s/ Luann L. Simmons

Luann L. Simmons

Attorneys for Defendant and 

Counterclaimant MAGMA DESIGN 

AUTOMATION, INC.

Case 3:04-cv-03923-MMC Document 519 Filed 10/31/05 Page 4 of 5
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

4

STIP . AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR 

MAGMA SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION

Case No. C04-03923 MMC

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

Honorable Maxine M. Chesney

United States District Judge

SF1:606259.1

October 31, 2005

Case 3:04-cv-03923-MMC Document 519 Filed 10/31/05 Page 5 of 5