Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-04191/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-04191-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Copyright 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

 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04191- JST

STEVE W. BERMAN (pro hac vice pending)

steve@hbsslaw.com 

MARK S. CARLSON (pro hac vice pending) 

markc@hbsslaw.com

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP

1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300 

Seattle, Washington 98101 

Telephone: (206) 623-7292 

Facsimile: (206) 623-0594 

KELLY M. KLAUS (SBN 161091)

kelly.klaus@mto.com 

ROHIT K. SINGLA (SBN 213057) 

rohit.singla@mto.com 

ELIA HERRERA (SBN 293278) 

elia.herrera@mto.com

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

560 Mission Street, 27th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94105-2907 

Telephone: (415) 512-4000 

Facsimile: (415) 512-4077

RIO S. PIERCE (SBN 298297) 

riop@hbsslaw.com 

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP

715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202 

Berkeley, California 94710 

Telephone: (510) 725-3000 

Facsimile: (510) 725-3001 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

GLENN D. POMERANTZ (SBN 112503) 

glenn.pomerantz@mto.com 

JOHN L. SCHWAB (SBN 301386) 

john.schwab@mto.com 

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

350 South Grand Avenue. 50th Floor 

Los Angeles, California 90071-3426 

Telephone: (213) 683-9100 

Facsimile: (213) 687-3702 

Attorneys for Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

REARDEN LLC and REARDEN MOVA 

LLC, 

Plaintiffs,

vs. 

TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM 

CORPORATION and TWENTIETH 

CENTURY FOX HOME ENTERTAINMENT 

LLC,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:17-cv-04191-JST

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ 

MOTIONS TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO 

FRCP 12(b)(6) OR, ALTERNATIVELY, 

TO STAY

Judge: Hon. Jon S. Tigar

Case 3:17-cv-04191-JST Document 20 Filed 09/18/17 Page 1 of 6
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- JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04191- JST

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Plaintiffs Rearden LLC and Rearden MOVA LLC (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants Twentieth 

Century Fox Film Corporation and Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment LLC 

(“Defendants”), by and through their counsel of record, stipulate as follows: 

WHEREAS, on July 24, 2017, Plaintiffs filed their complaint against Defendants (Dkt. 1) 

and Defendants were all served by July 31, 2017; 

WHEREAS, by joint stipulation, the parties agreed that Defendants’ deadline to answer or 

otherwise respond to the complaint would be extended to and including September 15, 2017 (Dkt. 

13); 

WHEREAS, on July 31, 2017, this Court found that the above-captioned case (Rearden v.

Fox) is related to the following cases, which are now pending before this court (Dkt. 8): 

• Shenzhenshi Haitiecheng Science and Technology v. Rearden LLC, No.15-cv00797-JST (SHST v. Rearden) 

• Rearden LLC v. The Walt Disney Co., No. 17-cv-04006-JST (Rearden v. Disney) 

• Rearden LLC v. Crystal Dynamics, Inc., No. 17-cv-04187-JST (Rearden v. Crystal 

Dynamics) 

• Rearden LLC v. Paramount Pictures Corp., No. 17-cv-04192-JST (Rearden v.

Paramount) 

WHEREAS, the Defendants in Rearden v. Disney, Rearden v. Fox, and Rearden v.

Paramount all intend to file motions to dismiss the complaints pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 

12(b)(6), or, alternatively, to stay proceedings in those cases in the event the Court certifies the 

requested entry of judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) in SHST v. Rearden and also grants 

Virtual Global Holdings Limited’s forthcoming motion to stay proceedings in that case pending 

the disposition of an immediate appeal pursuant to Rule 54(b); 

WHEREAS, the Defendants in Rearden v. Disney, Rearden v. Fox, and Rearden v.

Paramount are represented by the same counsel and will be making similar arguments in support 

of their dismissal motions on common issues; 

Case 3:17-cv-04191-JST Document 20 Filed 09/18/17 Page 2 of 6
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- JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04191- JST

WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiffs and for the Defendants in Rearden v. Disney, Rearden 

v. Fox, and Rearden v. Paramount have met and conferred regarding the most efficient way to file 

documents related to Defendants’ upcoming motions to dismiss and have agreed upon the 

following procedure: 

• Defendants in Rearden v. Disney, Rearden v. Fox, and Rearden v. Paramount will 

file the same consolidated Motion to Dismiss or Stay and supporting papers in all 

three cases;

• Plaintiffs will file the same consolidated Opposition and supporting papers in all 

three cases; 

• Defendants will file the same consolidated Reply and supporting papers in all three 

cases; and

• Defendants’ consolidated Motion to Dismiss or Stay will be within the applicable 

page and other limitations of this Court’s Local Rules. Plaintiffs and Defendants 

presently intend for their consolidated Opposition and Reply papers, respectively, 

to be within the same limitations. This stipulation does not preclude either side 

from seeking an extension of those limitations, either by stipulation or Order based 

on good cause. 

WHEREAS, the purpose of the foregoing procedure is to ensure that the Court and 

opposing counsel will need to review only one set of briefing papers in dealing with these Motions 

while preserving the record of each set of filings concerning the Motions in each of the respective 

case dockets;

WHEREAS, the parties further agree that if Defendants file their Rule 12(b)(6) motions 

on September 15, 2017, Plaintiffs’ responsive brief and supporting materials will be due on 

October 16, 2017, Defendants’ reply brief and supporting materials will be due on November 2, 

2017; and Defendants will notice the Motions for hearing on November 16, 2017, at 2:00 p.m.; 

WHEREAS, the parties will confer with one another and the Courtroom Deputy regarding 

a procedure to propose to the Court in the Joint Case Management Statement regarding the 

Case 3:17-cv-04191-JST Document 20 Filed 09/18/17 Page 3 of 6
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- JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04191- JST

coordination of all of the related cases so that parties may file documents in only one master 

docket; 

WHEREAS, the Defendants in Rearden v. Crystal Dynamics are not represented by 

counsel for the Defendants in Rearden v. Disney, Rearden v. Fox, and Rearden v. Paramount, and 

therefore any motion directed to the pleading that Defendants in Rearden v. Crystal Dynamics will 

not present the need for a single consolidated brief; nevertheless, to ensure a coordinated briefing 

schedule and the need for the Court to consider and hear all motions directed to the pleadings at 

the same time, Plaintiffs will agree that briefing on any motion filed by the parties to Rearden v.

Crystal Dynamics shall take place according to the same time and page-limit schedule set forth 

above; 

NOW THEREFORE, for good cause, the parties in the Rearden v. Disney, Rearden v.

Fox, and Rearden v. Paramount cases stipulate that the documents relevant to Defendants’ 

motions to dismiss the complaints and Plaintiffs’ responsive brief in these cases will be filed 

pursuant to the procedure and deadlines set forth above. 

Case 3:17-cv-04191-JST Document 20 Filed 09/18/17 Page 4 of 6
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- JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04191- JST

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: September 14, 2017 HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP

By: /s/ Mark S. Carlson

MARK S. CARLSON

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

DATED: September 14, 2017 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

By: /s/ Kelly M. Klaus

KELLY M. KLAUS

Attorneys for Defendants 

CIVIL LOCAL RULE 5-1 ATTESTATION

 I, Kelly M. Klaus, am the ECF user whose credentials were utilized in the electronic filing 

of this document. In accordance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that Mark S. 

Carlson concurred in the filing of this document. 

 /s/Kelly M. Klaus 

Case 3:17-cv-04191-JST Document 20 Filed 09/18/17 Page 5 of 6
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

 -5- JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

CASE NO. 3:17-CV-04191- JST

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: _______________, 2017

The Honorable Jon S. Tigar

September 15

Case 3:17-cv-04191-JST Document 20 Filed 09/18/17 Page 6 of 6