Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-01785/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-01785-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 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 

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER 

TO ADJUST CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING SCHEDULES 

CASE NO. C02-5693 VRW 

2805099_1.DOC 

Keaton S. Parekh, State Bar No. 214396 

Jimmy M. Shin, State Bar No. 200161 

McDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP 

3150 Porter Drive 

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1212 

Telephone: 650-813-5000 

Facsimile: 650-813-5100 

jshin@mwe.com

Mark G. Davis (Pro Hac Vice) 

D. Sean Trainor (Pro Hac Vice) 

McDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP 

600 13th Street, N.W. 

Washington D. C. 20005-3096 

Telephone: 202-756-8000 

Facsimile: 202-756-8087 

Ron E. Shulman, State Bar No. 178263 

Terry Kearney, State Bar No. 160054 

Michael A. Berta, State Bar No. 194650 

Michael B. Levin, State Bar No. 172329 

Christopher Parry, State Bar No. 209858 

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & 

ROSATI 

Professional Corporation 

650 Page Mill Road 

Palo Alto, CA 94303-1050 

Telephone: (650) 493-9300 

Facsimile: (650) 565-5100 

cparry@wsgr.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

TREND MICRO INCORPORATED 

Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaimant 

FORTINET, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

TREND MICRO INCORPORATED, a California corporation; 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

FORTINET, INC., a Delaware Corporation; 

 Defendant. 

CASE NO. C04-01785 RMW 

JOINT STIPULATION AND 

ORDER TO ADJUST CLAIM 

CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING AND 

RELATED SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

BRIEFING SCHEDULES 

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, Trend Micro Incorporated (“Trend Micro”) and 

Fortinet, Inc. (“Fortinet”), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate to adjust 

the claim construction briefing and related summary judgment briefing schedules, subject to the 

Court’s approval. 

Case 5:04-cv-01785-RMW Document 47 Filed 01/26/06 Page 1 of 3
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 ORDER 

TO ADJUST CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING SCHEDULES 

CASE NO. C02-5693 VRW

-2- 2805099_1.DOC 

Pursuant to the Case Management Order (the “Order”) and Patent Local Rules 4-5(a) and 

4-5(b), the parties were to simultaneously exchange opening claim construction briefs on January 

9, 2006 and simultaneously exchange their opposition claim construction briefs on January 30, 

2006. In a joint stipulation filed, January 6, 2006, the parties requested that opening claim 

construction briefs be moved from January 9, to January 12, that opposition briefs would be 

exchanged as scheduled by the Order on January 30, and that the February 14 date of the hearing 

remain unchanged. The parties also requested that Trend Micro’s opposition to Fortinet’s Partial 

Summary Judgment Motion, filed January 12, would be due January 25 with Fortinet’s reply due 

on January 31. 

The parties are currently engaged in active settlement negotiations regarding this case and 

the related litigation before the International Trade Commission. In light of these ongoing 

negotiations, Trend Micro and Fortinet hereby jointly and respectfully request that the briefing 

schedule regarding claim construction and Fortinet’s summary judgment motion be extended as 

outlined in the following table, subject to the Court’s approval: 

Event Order January 6 

Stipulation 

Current 

Request 

Trend Micro’s opposition to Fortinet’s 

Partial Summary Judgment Motion 

January 25, 

2006 

February 1, 

2006 

Opposition claim construction briefs January 30, 

2006 

January 30, 

2006 

February 1, 

2006 

Fortinet’s Reply to Trend Micro’s 

Opposition to Fortinets Partial Summary 

Judgment Motion 

January 31, 

2006 

February 8, 

2006 

Claim Construction Hearing February 14, 

2006 

February 14, 

2006 

February 14, 

2006 

This joint stipulated request to adjust claim construction briefing and related summary 

judgment briefing schedules is made for good cause and not for purposes of delay. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED: 

//

Case 5:04-cv-01785-RMW Document 47 Filed 01/26/06 Page 2 of 3
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 ORDER 

TO ADJUST CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING SCHEDULES 

CASE NO. C02-5693 VRW

-3- 2805099_1.DOC 

Dated: January 21, 2006 MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP 

By: /s/ 

D. Sean Trainor 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Trend Micro Incorporated 

Dated: January 21, 2006 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI 

Professional Corporation 

By: /s/ 

Michael A. Berta 

Attorneys for Defendant 

 Fortinet, Inc. 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: ______________________________________ 

 United States District Judge 

Filer’s Attestation: Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B) regarding signatures, 

I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of the document has been obtained 

from D. Sean Trainor. 

Dated: January 23, 2006 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI 

Professional Corporation 

By: /s/ 

Michael A. Berta 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Fortinet, Inc. 

Case 5:04-cv-01785-RMW Document 47 Filed 01/26/06 Page 3 of 3