Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03923/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03923-85/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Patent Infringement

---

DECHERT LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

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 REGARDING OWNERSHIP TRIAL;

CASE NO. C-04-03923 MMC (JCS) 12345576.1

1

Chris Scott Graham (State Bar No. 114498)

chris.scott.graham@dechert.com

Michael N. Edelman (State Bar No. 180948)

michael.edelman@dechert.com

DECHERT LLP

1117 California Avenue

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1013

Telephone: 650.813.4800

Facsimile: 650.813.4848

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant,

SYNOPSYS, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

SYNOPSYS, INC., a Delaware 

corporation,

Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant,

v.

MAGMA DESIGN AUTOMATION, a 

Delaware corporation,

Defendant and Counter-Claimant.

Case No. C-04-03923 MMC (JCS)

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

REGARDING OWNERSHIP TRIAL

AND RELATED COUNTER-CLAIMS.

Case 3:04-cv-03923-MMC Document 1110 Filed 04/20/06 Page 1 of 3
DECHERT LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

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 REGARDING OWNERSHIP TRIAL;

CASE NO. C-04-03923 MMC (JCS) 12345576.1

1

WHEREAS, Synopsys has brought a motion in limine to exclude all evidence pertaining 

to the alleged conception of any patent claims by Magma engineers, including all evidence 

pertaining to alleged conception of the “buckets” claims, and Magma has opposed that motion;

WHEREAS, Magma has brought a motion in limine to withdraw certain responses to 

Request for Admissions relating to reduction to practice, or to exclude all evidence of those 

discovery responses, and Synopsys has opposed that motion; and,

WHEREAS, the parties wish to simplify the issues remaining to be tried at the Ownership 

Trial;

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

1. Magma withdraws its claim, whether as part of its affirmative case or for 

rebuttal, that Magma has an ownership interest in the ‘446 and ‘438 Patents, on the basis that the 

“buckets” claims (i.e., Claims 17, 18, 31, and 32 of the ‘446 Patent and Claims 17 and 18 of the 

‘438 Patent) were conceived by Magma engineers after Lukas van Ginneken left Synopsys.

2. Synopsys withdraws its contention that, by reason of Magma’s responses to 

Request for Admission Nos. 52 and 53, Magma is foreclosed from arguing that the inventions in 

the ‘446 or ‘438 Patent were reduced to practice after Lukas van Ginneken left Synopsys. These

responses do not preclude Magma from affirmatively seeking to prove that inventions in the ‘446 

and ‘438 Patents were reduced to practice by Synopsys and IBM after Lukas van Ginneken left 

Synopsys. Synopsys is not precluded from introducing these responses as evidence, or from 

contending that Magma is foreclosed from making arguments relating to reduction to practice 

other than by reason of Request for Admissions No. 52 and 53.

3. Nothing in this stipulation affects any contention, claim, or defense not specifically 

addressed herein, and the parties expressly reserve their rights with respect to any contention, 

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 3:04-cv-03923-MMC Document 1110 Filed 04/20/06 Page 2 of 3
DECHERT LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

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 REGARDING OWNERSHIP TRIAL;

CASE NO. C-04-03923 MMC (JCS) 12345576.1

2

claim, or defense not specifically addressed herein.

Dated: April 20, 2006 DECHERT LLP

By:/s/Michael N. Edelman

Michael N. Edelman

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant,

SYNOPSYS, INC.

Dated: April 20, 2006 O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

By:/s/George A. Riley

George A. Riley

Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-Claimant,

MAGMA DESIGN AUTOMATION, INC.

I declare under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has 

been obtained from George A. Riley.

Dated: April 20, 2006 DECHERT LLP

By:/s/Michael N. Edelman

Michael N. Edelman

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant,

SYNOPSYS, INC.

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ______________, 2006

HON. MAXINE M. CHESNEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

April 20

Case 3:04-cv-03923-MMC Document 1110 Filed 04/20/06 Page 3 of 3