Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-03717/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-03717-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

MCDERMOTT 

WILL & EMERY LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

PALO ALTO

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 MODIFYING 

DATE FOR PLAINTIFFS’ REPLY TO DEFENDANTS’ 

COUNTERCLAIMS 

 CASE NO. CV-06-3717 (MJJ) 

TERRENCE P. MCMAHON (State Bar No. 71910) 

tmcmahon@mwe.com 

ANTHONY DE ALCUAZ (State Bar No. 65599) 

adealcuaz@mwe.com 

McDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP 

3150 Porter Drive 

Palo Alto, CA 94304 

Telephone: (650) 813-5000 

Facsimile: (650) 813-5100 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES AUSTRALIA 

PTY LIMITED and ARISTOCRAT 

TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES 

AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED and 

ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

Plaintiffs,

v.

INTERNATIONAL GAME 

TECHNOLOGY and IGT, 

Defendants.

Case No. C 06-3717 (MJJ) 

ELECTRONIC CASE FILING 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

MODIFYING THE DATE FOR ARISTOCRAT 

TECHNOLOGIES AUSTRALIA PTY 

LIMITED AND ARISTOCRAT 

TECHNOLOGIES, INC. TO FILE REPLY TO 

DEFENDANTS’ COUNTERCLAIMS 

Before: Honorable Judge Martin J. Jenkins

This Stipulation and [Proposed] Order is entered into in light of the following: 

1. On July 28, 2006, IGT filed its answer, defenses and counterclaims. 

2. On August 17, 2006, Aristocrat filed it Motion to Strike, counterclaims of 

 defendants. 

3. On September 25, 2006, the Court denied Aristocrat’s Motion to Strike. 

4. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc., Rule 12, Plaintiffs’ reply to Defendants’ 

counterclaims is due on October 5, 2006. 

5. Aristocrat has requested, and IGT has agreed to, a one week extension of time for 

 Aristocrat to file its reply to IGT’s counterclaims. 

Case 3:06-cv-03717-MJJ Document 44 Filed 10/03/2006 Page 1 of 3 Case 5:06-cv-03717-RMW Document 45 Filed 10/10/06 Page 1 of 2
MCDERMOTT 

WILL & EMERY LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

PALO ALTO

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 MODIFYING 

DATE FOR PLAINTIFFS’ REPLY TO DEFENDANTS’ 

COUNTERCLAIMS

- 2 - CASE NO. CV-06-3717 (MJJ) 

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, that the time presently set for 

the filing and service of Aristocrat's reply to IGT's counterclaims may be extended from 

October 5, 2006 until October 12, 2006. 

Dated: October 3, 2006 Dated: October 3, 2006 

KLARQUIST SPARKMAN, LLP 

By: ___/s/Jeffrey Love__________________ Jeffrey Love 

Samir Pandya 

Garth A. Winn 

Attorneys for Defendants 

INTERNATIONAL GAME 

TECHNOLOGY AND IGT 

MC DERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP 

By: /s/ Arturo E. Sandoval 

Terrence P. McMahon 

Anthony de Alcuaz 

Arturo E. Sandoval 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES 

AUSTRALIA PTY LTD and 

ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES, 

INC.

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 

 MARTIN J. JENKINS 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 3:06-cv-03717-MJJ Document 44 Filed 10/03/2006 Page 2 of 3

10/10/2006

Case 5:06-cv-03717-RMW Document 45 Filed 10/10/06 Page 2 of 2