Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02523/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02523-0/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 [PROPOSED] ORDER 

RE QUIKSILVER'S RESPONSE TO

COMPLAINT

MICHAEL G. YODER (S.B. #83059)

IAN N. RAMAGE (S.B. #224881)

O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP

610 Newport Center Drive, 17th Floor

Newport Beach, CA 92660-6429

Telephone: (949) 760-9600

Facsimile: (949) 823-6994

Attorneys for Defendant

Quiksilver, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Richard W. Berger; Brant W. Berger;

Berger Enterprises Inc.,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROSSIGNOL S.A.; SKIS ROSSIGNOL 

S.A.; QUICKSILVER, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. C05 02523 EMC

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR 

QUIKSILVER, INC. TO RESPOND TO 

COMPLAINT

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Defendant Quiksilver, Inc. 

(“Quiksilver”), incorrectly named in the Complaint as Quicksilver, Inc., and Plaintiffs 

Richard W. Berger, Brant W. Berger and Berger Enterprises Inc. (collectively, “Berger”) 

as follows:

WHEREAS, Berger filed its Complaint against Quiksilver on June 21, 2005, 

and served Quiksilver on July 7, 2005;

WHEREAS, Berger has agreed to grant Quiksilver an extension of time to 

move or plead in response to the Complaint; 

WHEREAS, Quiksilver and Berger have agreed to a forty-one-day

extension to move or plead in response to Berger’s Complaint;

NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-1, the parties hereby 

Case 3:05-cv-02523-CRB Document 6 Filed 08/19/05 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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

RE QUIKSILVER'S RESPONSE TO 

COMPLAINT

2

stipulate as follows:

Defendant Quiksilver, Inc. shall answer or otherwise respond to Berger’s 

Complaint on or before September 6, 2005.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated:August 5, 2005

IAN N. RAMAGE

O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP

By: s/Ian N. Ramage

Ian N. Ramage

Attorneys for Defendant

Quiksilver, Inc.

Dated:August _____, 2005

DOUGLAS B. ALLEN

BURNETT, BURNETT, & ALLEN

By:

Douglas B. Allen

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Richard W. Berger; Brant W. Berger; 

Berger Enterprises Inc.

Case 3:05-cv-02523-CRB Document 6 Filed 08/19/05 Page 2 of 4
Case 3:05-cv-02523-CRB Document 6 Filed 08/19/05 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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

RE QUIKSILVER'S RESPONSE TO 

COMPLAINT

3

[PROPOSED] ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Quiksilver respond to Plaintiffs’ Complaint 

on or before September 6, 2005.

Dated: _____, 2005

Hon. Honorable Edward M. Chen

United States District Judge

August 19

Magistrate

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:05-cv-02523-CRB Document 6 Filed 08/19/05 Page 4 of 4