Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03707/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03707-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Trademark 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 

CASE NO.: 5:15-CV-03707-PSG 

HAROLD H. DAVIS, JR. (SBN 235552)

harold.davis@klgates.com

K&L GATES LLP

Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200 

San Francisco, California 94111 

Tel: (415)882-8200 

Fax: (415)882-8220 

Attorneys for Defendants CYBERLINK CORP., 

PERFECT CORP. (CALIFORNIA), PERFECT 

CORP. (CAYMAN ISLANDS) 

Otto O. Lee, CA Bar No. 173987 

olee@iplg.com

Kevin Viau, CA Bar No. 275556 

kviau@iplg.com

Bonnie J. Wolf, CA Bar No. 284872 

bonniewolf@iplg.com

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP LLP

12 South First Street, 12th Floor 

San Jose, California 95113 

Tel: (408) 286-8933 

Fax: (408) 286-8932 

Attorneys for Plaintiff ARCSOFT INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

ARCSOFT INC.,

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

CYBERLINK CORP., a Taiwan, R.O.C. 

corporation, PERFECT CORP., a California 

corporation, and PERFECT CORP., a Cayman 

Islands corporation, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 5:15-cv-03707-PSG

STIPULATION TO CHANGE TIME OF 

BRIEFING SCHEDULE, HEARING ON 

ARCSOFT’S PRELIMINARY 

INJUNCTION MOTION, AND DATE FOR 

DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO 

COMPLAINT, AND RE: DEFENDANTS’ 

ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF 

PROCESS; [PROPOSED] ORDER 

Case 3:15-cv-03707-WHO Document 26 Filed 09/15/15 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

28 

1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

CASE NO.: 5:15-CV-03707-PSG 

STIPULATION 

Per L. R. 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiff Arcsoft Inc. (“Arcsoft”) and defendants Cyberlink Corp., 

Perfect Corp. (California), and Perfect Corp. (Cayman Islands) (collectively “Defendants” and, 

together with Arcsoft, the “Parties”) hereby stipulate and agree, subject to the approval of the Court, 

and jointly submit this Stipulation as follows: 

1. Arcsoft filed its Complaint against Defendants on August 13, 2015. 

2. Arcsoft filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Dkt. # 10-16] and supporting 

materials on September 1, 2015. 

3. Arcsoft served the Summons, Complaint and the moving papers filed in support of 

Arcsoft’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (collectively, “Plaintiff’s Pleadings”) on Defendant 

Perfect Corp. (California) on September 2, 2015. Arcsoft has not yet served the foreign based 

defendants, Cyberlink Corp. or Perfect Corp. (Cayman Islands) (collectively, the “Foreign 

Defendants”). 

4. Acting by and through their authorized counsel-of-record herein as captioned above, 

Defendants have agreed to accept service of Plaintiff’s Pleadings in exchange for moving certain 

deadlines. 

5. In exchange for Defendants accepting service as stated above, the Parties have 

mutually agreed that (a) the deadline for Defendants to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the 

Complaint under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure would be November 10, 2015, and (b) the 

deadline for Defendants to file their opposition to Arcsoft’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction shall 

be moved from September 15, 2015 to November 10, 2015. 

6. In the interest of judicial economy, Defendants also stipulate not to file any motion to 

dismiss the Complaint before November 10, 2015 nor one with a hearing before December 8, 2015 or 

Case 3:15-cv-03707-WHO Document 26 Filed 09/15/15 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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

CASE NO.: 5:15-CV-03707-PSG 

any later hearing on Arcsoft’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Defendants further stipulate and 

agree that they shall be subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court in this action. 

7. The Parties further stipulate that the deadline for Arcsoft to file its reply brief in 

support of its motion for Preliminary Injunction shall be moved from September 22, 2015 to 

November 24, 2015. 

8. The Parties also agree and request of the Court that, in light of the above-stipulated 

extensions on the briefing schedule, the hearing on Arcsoft’s motion for preliminary injunction be 

rescheduled from October 6, 2015 to December 8, 2015 or thereafter as appropriate with the Court’s 

calendar. 

9. The Parties submit that the above-referenced extensions will allow sufficient time for 

the Defendants to adequately respond to the Complaint and the Motion for Preliminary Injunction, in 

light of the foreign residence of two defendants, the fact that Defendants’ counsel will be out of the 

country during the currently scheduled hearing date on the motion for preliminary injunction, and due 

to the allegations and issues presented by Arcsoft’s filings. 

10. None of the Parties have previously requested any change to any deadline in this case. 

11. This request affects only the hearing date for the preliminary injunction and the 

briefing schedule on that motion. It does not affect any other dates currently scheduled by the Court. 

Now, therefore, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the 

Court, that: 

a. Defendants have agreed to accept service of Plaintiff’s Pleadings through their 

authorized counsel-of-record as listed above. 

b. Defendants have agreed not to file any motion to dismiss the Complaint before 

November 10, 2015 nor one with a hearing before December 8, 2015 or any later 

Case 3:15-cv-03707-WHO Document 26 Filed 09/15/15 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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

CASE NO.: 5:15-CV-03707-PSG 

hearing on Arcsoft’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Defendants have agreed that 

they shall be subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court in this action. 

c. Defendants’ time to answer, move, or otherwise respond to Arcsoft’s Complaint and 

Motion for a Preliminary Injunction is moved to on or before November 10, 2015. 

d. Arcsoft’s time to file a reply brief in support of its Motion for a Preliminary Injunction 

is moved to on or before November 24, 2015. 

e. The hearing on Arcsoft’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, if any, will occur on or 

after December 8, 2015. 

/// 

Case 3:15-cv-03707-WHO Document 26 Filed 09/15/15 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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

CASE NO.: 5:15-CV-03707-PSG 

 IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED. 

Dated: September 11, 2015 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Otto O. Lee /s/ Harold H. Davis 

Otto O. Lee 

olee@iplg.com

Kevin Viau 

kviau@iplg.com

Bonnie J. Wolf 

bonniewolf@iplg.com

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP LLP 

12 South First Street, 12th Floor 

San Jose, California 95113 

Tel: (408) 286-8933 

Fax: (408) 286-8932 

Attorneys for Arcsoft Inc. 

Harold H. Davis 

harold.davis@klgates.com

K&L GATES LLP 

4 Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Tel: (415) 882-8200 

Fax: (415) 882-8220

Attorneys for Defendants Cyberlink Corp., 

Perfect Corp. (California), Perfect Corp. 

(Cayman Islands) 

SIGNATURE ATTESTATION 

I hereby attest pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5.1 that concurrence in the electronic filing of this 

document has been obtained from the other signatory. 

 Dated: September 11, 2015 /s/ Otto O. Lee 

 Otto O. Lee 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Hearing on Motion to Dismiss is set for December 9, 2015 at 2:00 p.m.

DATED: September ___, 2015 _______________________________________ 

 The Honorable _____________________ 

 Judge of the U.S. District Court 

Case 3:15-cv-03707-WHO Document 26 Filed 09/15/15 Page 5 of 5