Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05422/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05422-0/pdf.json

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

---

[Proposed] Order re Stipulation on Dismissal of Defendant Friendster, Inc. 

No. 5:09-cv-05422-JF 

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

DICKSTEIN 

SHAPIRO LLP 

DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP 

Alfred R Fabricant (admitted pro hac vice) 

fabricanta@dicksteinshapiro.com 

Lawrence C. Drucker (admitted pro hac vice) 

druckerl@dicksteinshapiro.com 

Cindy Yang (admitted pro hac vice) 

yangc@dicksteinshapiro.com 

Bryan N. DeMatteo (admitted pro hac vice) 

dematteob@dicksteinshapiro.com 

1633 Broadway 

New York, NY 10019-6708 

Telephone: (212) 277-6500 

Fax: (212) 277-6501 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

BALTHASER ONLINE, INC. 

PATTERSON & SHERIDAN LLP 

John C. Carey (SBN 214800) 

250 Cambridge Ave., Suite 300 

Palo Alto, CA 94306 

Telephone: 650-330-2310 

Fax: 650-330-2314 

jcarey@pattersonsheridan.com 

Attorneys for Defendant 

FRIENDSTER, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

BALTHASER ONLINE, INC., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ART STAR DESIGN LLC, et al. 

Defendants. 

 No. 5:09-cv-05422-JF 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE 

STIPULATION ON DISMISSAL OF 

DEFENDANT FRIENDSTER, INC. 

------------------

Case 3:09-cv-05422-RS Document 400 Filed 01/08/10 Page 1 of 3
2 

[Proposed] Order re Stipulation on Dismissal of Defendant Friendster, Inc. 

No. 5:09-cv-05422-JF 

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

DICKSTEIN 

SHAPIRO LLP

WHEREAS, (1) on November, 4, 2008, Plaintiff Balthaser Online, Inc. (“Balthaser”) 

filed a Complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall 

Division, commencing Civil Action No. 2:08-cv-430 (DF) (the “E.D. Texas Action”) against, among 

others, Defendant Friendster, Inc. (“Friendster”); (2) on January 5, 2009, Friendster filed an Answer 

and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff’s Complaint; (3) on January 15, 2009, Balthaser filed a First 

Amended Complaint; (4) on February 2, 2009, Friendster filed an Answer and Affirmative Defenses 

to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint; (5) on September 15, 2009, an Order concerning California 

Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue was issued transferring the E.D. Texas Action with respect to 

California Defendants, including Friendster, to this District; (6) on November 17, 2009, the E.D. 

Texas Action was transferred to this District and assigned to the Honorable Patricia V. Trumbell; 

and (7) on December 15, 2009, the E.D. Texas Action was reassigned to this Court. 

WHEREAS, Balthaser and Friendster (individually, the “Party”; collectively, the 

“Parties”) have reached a mutually satisfactory resolution of all issues between them that were the 

subject of the E.D. Texas Action and the above-styled action (collectively, “the Action”); 

WHEREAS, Balthaser and Friendster have filed a Stipulation on Dismissal of 

Defendant Friendster, Inc. and [Proposed] Order (the “Stipulation”) with this Court advising the 

Court that the Parties have reached a mutually satisfactory resolution of all issues between them that 

were subject of the Action; 

NOW, THEREFORE, after considering the Stipulation, the Court is of the opinion 

that the Stipulation should be granted and therefore, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND 

DECREED THAT: 

Case 3:09-cv-05422-RS Document 400 Filed 01/08/10 Page 2 of 3
3 

[Proposed] Order re Stipulation on Dismissal of Defendant Friendster, Inc. 

No. 5:09-cv-05422-JF 

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

DICKSTEIN 

SHAPIRO LLP

1. All claims and counterclaims asserted by either Party in the Action against the 

other are hereby dismissed with prejudice; 

2. Each Party shall bear its own costs, expenses and attorneys’ fees associated 

with the prosecution and defense of the Action; 

3. All unresolved pending motions in the Action between the Parties shall be 

denied as moot; and 

4. This Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter for purposes of 

enforcement of the settlement. 

DATED: December __, 2009 __________________________________ 

 Honorable Jeremy Fogel 

 United States District Judge 

------------------------

January 4, 2010

Case 3:09-cv-05422-RS Document 400 Filed 01/08/10 Page 3 of 3