Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-04244/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-04244-14/pdf.json

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHARP CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

 v.

AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, et al.,

Defendants /

No. C-03-4244 MMC ARB

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANTS TO

LODGE CHAMBERS COPIES IN

COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL

ORDER 45 AND THE COURT’S

STANDING ORDERS

On June 10, 2005, defendants electronically filed their opposition to plaintiff’s motion

to bifurcate. Defendants have violated General Order 45 and the Court’s Standing Orders,

however, by failing to deliver to the Clerk’s Office “no later than noon on the business day

following the day that the papers are filed electronically, one paper copy of each document

that is filed electronically . . . marked ‘Chambers Copy’ and . . . clearly marked with the

judge’s name, case number, and ‘Chambers Copy-Do Not File.’” See General Order 45

§ VII.G; see also Standing Orders For Civil Cases Assigned to The Honorable Maxine M.

Chesney ¶ 2.

Defendants are hereby ORDERED to comply with General Order 45 and the Court’s

Standing Orders by immediately submitting chambers copies of the above-referenced

document. All parties are hereby advised that if either party fails in the future to comply

with the Court’s Standing Order to provide chambers copies of electronically-filed

Case 3:03-cv-04244-MMC Document 869 Filed 06/16/05 Page 1 of 2
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

documents, the Court may impose sanctions on the noncomplying party, including, but not

limited to, striking from the record any electronically-filed document of which a chambers

copy has not been timely provided to the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 16, 2005 /s/ Maxine M. Chesney 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:03-cv-04244-MMC Document 869 Filed 06/16/05 Page 2 of 2