Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_00-md-01369/USCOURTS-cand-3_00-md-01369-30/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 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. C-MDL-00-1369 MHP 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

IN RE NAPSTER, INC. COPYRIGHT 

LITIGATION 

CASE NO. C-MDL-00-1369 MHP 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

LEIBER, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

BERTELSMANN AG, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. C 04-1671 MHP 

CAPITOL RECORDS, INC., et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

BERTELSMANN AG, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. C 04-2121 MHP 

Case 3:00-md-01369-MHP Document 1129 Filed 10/05/06 Page 1 of 4
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 2 Case No. C-MDL-00-1369 MHP 

 

UMG RECORDINGS, INC. et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

HUMMER WINBLAD VENTURE 

PARTNERS et al., 

Defendants. 

No. C 04-1166 MHP 

 WHEREAS, the Leiber and EMI Plaintiffs filed and served their Notice of Conditional 

Motion and Motion for Continuance of Bertelsmann’s Motion for Summary Judgment [FRCP 

56(f)] on September 22, 2006, and noticed that Conditional Motion for hearing on November 14, 

2006; 

WHEREAS, the UMG and EMI Plaintiffs filed and served their Notice of Conditional 

Motion and Motion for Continuance of Hummer Winblad’s Motion for Summary Judgment 

[FRCP 56(f)] on September 22, 2006, and noticed that Conditional Motion for hearing on 

November 14, 2006; 

WHEREAS, pursuant to the September 7, 2006 Stipulation and Order, October 27, 2006 

is the time by which the Bertelsmann Defendants and the Hummer Winblad Defendants must file 

and serve their reply briefs in support of their respective Motions for Summary Judgment, and the 

Motions for Summary Judgment are set for hearing on November 14, 2006; 

WHEREAS, under the Local Rules, the Bertelsmann and Hummer Winblad Defendants’ 

oppositions to the aforementioned Conditional Motions under FRCP 56(f) otherwise would be 

due not later than October 24, 2006; and 

WHEREAS, the Bertelsmann and Hummer Winblad Defendants have requested, and all 

plaintiffs have agreed, that the oppositions to the aforementioned Conditional Motions under 

FRCP 56(f) be due on the same date as the defendants’ summary judgment reply briefs, i.e., on 

October 27, 2006; 

Case 3:00-md-01369-MHP Document 1129 Filed 10/05/06 Page 2 of 4
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 3 Case No. C-MDL-00-1369 MHP 

 

NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS: 

1. The time for the Bertelsmann Defendants to file their opposition to the Leiber and 

EMI Plaintiffs’ Motion for Continuance of Bertelsmann’s Motion for Summary 

Judgment shall be October 27, 2006; 

2. The time for the Hummer Winblad Defendants to file their opposition to the UMG 

and EMI Plaintiffs’ Motion for Continuance of Hummer Winblad’s Motion for 

Summary Judgment shall be October 27, 2006. 

Dated: 10/04/06 /s/ R. Bruce Rich 

 R. Bruce Rich (pro hac vice) 

 WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 

 Attorneys for Bertelsmann Defendants 

Dated: 10/04/06 /s/ Glenn D. Pomerantz 

Glenn D. Pomerantz 

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP 

Attorneys for UMG Plaintiffs 

Dated: 10/04/06 /s/ Peter L. Simmons 

 Peter L. Simmons 

FRIED, FRANK, HARRIS, SHRIVER & 

JACOBSON LLP 

Attorneys for EMI Plaintiffs 

Dated: 10/04/06 /s/ Lynn B. Bayard 

Lynn B. Bayard (pro hac vice)

PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & 

GARRISON LLP 

Attorneys for Leiber Plaintiffs 

Dated: 10/04/06 /s/ R. James Slaughter 

R. James Slaughter 

KEKER & VAN NEST LLP 

 Attorneys for Hummer Winblad Defendants 

Case 3:00-md-01369-MHP Document 1129 Filed 10/05/06 Page 3 of 4
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 4 Case No. C-MDL-00-1369 MHP 

 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: __________________ ___________________________________ 

 Hon. Marilyn Hall Patel 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

pp 1-3 Stipulation. 10/5/2006

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Marilyn H. Patel

Case 3:00-md-01369-MHP Document 1129 Filed 10/05/06 Page 4 of 4