Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04596/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04596-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 Patent Infringement

---

51115/2024704.1 -1- Case No. C 06-04596; Case No. C 06-04660; C 06-4659 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESCHEDULING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

[Counsel List on Signature Page] 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

INTERTRUST TECHNOLOGIES CORP., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

MACROVISION CORP., 

Defendant. 

 Case No. C 06-04596 JW 

(consolidated with Case Nos. C 06-04660 JW 

and C 06-4659 JW) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER RESCHEDULING HEARING ON 

INTERTRUST’S MOTION TO 

BIFURCATE 

STIPULATION

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, defendant Macrovision Corp. (“Macrovision”) and 

plaintiff Intertrust Technologies Corp (“Intertrust”) hereby stipulate and move this Court for an 

order rescheduling (i) the deadlines for filing the opposition and reply concerning Intertrust’s 

Motion to Bifurcate to February 2, 2007 and February 9, 2007 respectively and (ii) the hearing 

date for the Motion from February 26, 2007 to February 23, 2007. 

WHEREAS, on January 23, 2007, Intertrust filed its Motion to Bifurcate the Inequitable 

Conduct and Priority Issues and Stay Discovery Unrelated to Inequitable Conduct (Corrected) 

with a hearing date set for February 26, 2007 (Docket No. 52); 

WHEREAS, the Court has scheduled a three-hour tutorial for this case on February 23, 

2007 (Docket No. 43) 

WHEREAS, under Civil Local Rule 7-3, Macrovision’s Opposition to Intertrust’s Motion 

would be due on February 5, 2007 and Intertrust’s Reply would be due on February 12, 2007; and 

WHEREAS, the parties expect the tutorial to require less than three hours of the Court’s 

time and the parties would be before the Court for this case on two consecutive business days on 

related matters; consolidation of the tutorial and the hearing on Intertrust’s Motion to one day 

would be a more efficient use of the Court’s calendar. 

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

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

Case 5:06-cv-04596-JW Document 55 Filed 02/06/07 Page 1 of 4
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties stipulate that the deadline for the filing of Macrovision’s 

Opposition to Intertrust motion be reset for February 2, 2007 and Intertrust’s Reply be reset for 

February 9, 2007 and that the hearing on Intertrust’s Motion be reset for February 23, 2007. 

The parties have not sought any previous modifications pursuant to Local Rule 6-2 for this 

Motion. 

 The parties hereby request that the Court adopt the parties’ stipulation as the order of this 

Court. 

 The parties believe that the present stipulated rescheduling of the Motion will not affect 

any other dates currently on calendar, nor adversely affect the schedule for this case. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

DATED: January 31, 2007 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & 

NEUSTADT, P.C. 

 By /s/ Charles L. Gholz 

 Charles L. Gholz 

Attorneys for Defendant MACROVISION CORP.

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART OLIVER & 

HEDGES, LLP 

 Claude M. Stern (Bar No. 96737) 

 claudestern@quinnemanuel.com 

 Michael D. Powell (Bar No. 202850) 

 mikepowell@quinnemanuel.com 

555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 560 

Redwood Shores, California 94065-2139 

Telephone: (650) 801-5000 

Facsimile: (650) 801-5100 

OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & 

NEUSTADT, P.C. 

 Charles L. Gholz (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

 cgholz@oblon.com 

 W. Todd Baker (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 

 tbaker@oblon.com 

 Frank J. West (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 

 fwest@oblon.com 

1940 Duke Street 

Alexandria, VA 22314 

Telephone: 703-413-3000 

Facsimile: 703-413-2220 

Case 5:06-cv-04596-JW Document 55 Filed 02/06/07 Page 2 of 4
DAVIDSON, BERQUIST, JACKSON & GOWDEY, 

LLP 

 Michael R. Casey (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 

 mcasey@davidsonberquist.com 

4300 Wilson Blvd., 7th Floor 

Arlington, Virginia 22203 

Telephone: 703-894-6406 

Facsimile: 703-894-6430 

Attorneys for Defendant 

MACROVISION CORPORATION 

DATED: January 31, 2007 FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT 

& DUNNER, LLP 

 By /s/ Linda J. Thayer 

 Linda J. Thayer (SBN 195,115) 

Attorneys for Plaintiff INTERTRUST 

TECHNOLOGIES CORP. 

FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, 

GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P. 

Linda J. Thayer, Esq. 

linda.thayer@finnegan.com

Stanford Research Park 

3300 Hillview Avenue 

Palo Alto, California 94304-1203 

Telephone: (650) 849-6600 

Facsimile: (650) 849-6666 

Barbara C. McCurdy, Esq. (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 

barbara.mccurdy@finnegan.com 

901 New York Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20001 

Telephone: (202) 408-4000 

Facsimile: (202) 408-4400 

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant 

INTERTRUST TECHNOLOGIES 

CORPORATION 

Case 5:06-cv-04596-JW Document 55 Filed 02/06/07 Page 3 of 4
[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: ___________________

 James Ware 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

----------------- 2/6/2007

Case 5:06-cv-04596-JW Document 55 Filed 02/06/07 Page 4 of 4