Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-01885/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-01885-74/pdf.json

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

---

1

STIPULATED AND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL; ORDER 

CASE NO. 4:18-CV-01885-HSG 

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 

[All counsel listed on signature page]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

OAKLAND DIVISION 

IN RE KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS PATENT 

LITIGATION 

 Case No. 4:18-cv-01885-HSG

STIPULATED AND UNOPPOSED 

MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY 

DISMISSAL; ORDER

Case 4:18-cv-01885-HSG Document 965 Filed 01/31/20 Page 1 of 9
2

STIPULATED AND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL; ORDER

 CASE NO. 4:18-CV-01885-HSG 

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 

INTRODUCTION 

Plaintiffs Koninklijke Philips N.V. and U.S. Philips Corporation (collectively, “Philips”) and 

Defendants Microsoft Corporation and Microsoft Mobile Inc. (collectively, “Microsoft”) have 

entered into a confidential settlement agreement resolving all claims between them in this action 

(“the Philips/Microsoft Claims”). 

Therefore, Philips and Microsoft jointly file this motion under Civil L.R. 7-12 asking the 

Court to enter the parties’ Stipulation of Dismissal filed herewith, which dismisses the 

Philips/Microsoft Claims pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) (“Rule 41(a)(2)”) 

under the terms set forth in that Stipulation of Dismissal. 

Of note, lead counsel for Philips has attempted to meet and confer with counsel for all the 

remaining parties to this action, namely, HTC Corp. and HTC America, Inc. (collectively, “HTC”), 

ASUS Computer International and ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. (collectively, “ASUS”), and YiFang 

USA Inc. d/b/a E-Fun, Inc. (“YiFang”), regarding this motion. While YiFang has not responded to 

date, HTC and ASUS have both indicated they will not oppose this motion. 

BRIEF PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 

Philips initially filed this patent infringement action in the District of Delaware (1:15-cv1126-GMS), asserting, among other things, that certain of HTC’s, Asus’s, and YiFang’s computing 

devices include hardware and/or software containing functionality covered by one more claims of 

the patents-in-suit (“Related Actions”). 

Subsequently, Microsoft filed a Complaint in Intervention in the Asus action and the YiFang 

action as the supplier of the operating system incorporated into some of Asus’s and YiFang’s 

accused products. In their collective pleadings, Microsoft asserts against Philips counterclaims of 

non-infringement under the Declaratory Judgments Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201(a) and 2202, and Philips 

asserts against Microsoft claims of direct and indirect infringement. Dkt. Nos. 74, 86, 93, 154. 

On March 27, 2018, this action and the Related Actions were transferred to this Court from 

the District of Delaware, and all of these cases were consolidated under the above-captioned case. 

As indicated, with the present motion, Philips and Microsoft jointly move the Court to 

dismiss all of the Philips/Microsoft Claims under the terms of the parties’ Stipulation of Dismissal in 

Case 4:18-cv-01885-HSG Document 965 Filed 01/31/20 Page 2 of 9
3

STIPULATED AND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL; ORDER 

CASE NO. 4:18-CV-01885-HSG 

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 

view of their confidential settlement agreement. However, this motion does not seek any relief with 

respect to the pending claims between Philips and any of HTC, ASUS, or YiFang. 

DISCUSSION 

Under Rule 41(a)(2), after an opposing party has served an answer or motion for summary 

judgment, “an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s request only by court order, on terms that 

the court considers proper.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). Moreover, a “plaintiff may invoke Rule 41(a) 

to dismiss fewer than all of the parties to an action.” Schaeffer v. Gregory Vill. Partners, L.P., 2016 

WL 9185388, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2016) (citing Lake at Las Vegas Investors Group, Inc. v. Pac. 

Malibu Dev. Corp., 933 F.2d 724, 726 (9th Cir. 1991)). 

The decision to grant or deny a request to dismiss pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) is within this 

Court’s sound discretion. Id. (citing Sams v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 625 F.2d 273, 277 (9th Cir. 

1980)). However, “[a] district court should grant a motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 

41(a)(2) unless a defendant can show that it will suffer some plain legal prejudice as a result.” Id. 

(quoting Smith v. Lenches, 263 F.3d 972, 975 (9th Cir. 2001)). Legal prejudice means “prejudice to 

some legal interest, some legal claim, [or] some legal argument.” Id. (quoting Westlands Water Dist. 

v. United States, 100 F.3d 94, 97 (9th Cir. 1996)).

Here, YiFang has thus far voiced no objection, and HTC and ASUS have indicated that they 

do not oppose this motion. Moreover, via this Stipulated and Unopposed Motion, Philips and 

Microsoft do not ask the Court to take any action with respect to any of the claims pending between 

Philips and any of HTC, ASUS, or YiFang. As a result, HTC, ASUS, and YiFang will suffer no 

legal prejudice as a result of the dismissal of the Philips/Microsoft Claims. 

CONCLUSION

For these reasons, the parties respectively request that the Court grant this motion and enter 

the parties’ Stipulation of Dismissal filed herewith as the order of this Court. 

Case 4:18-cv-01885-HSG Document 965 Filed 01/31/20 Page 3 of 9
4

STIPULATED AND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL; ORDER 

CASE NO. 4:18-CV-01885-HSG

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 

Dated: January 29, 2020 

Respectfully submitted,

Chris Holland (SBN 164053) 

Lori Holland (SBN 202309) 

HOLLAND LAW LLP 

220 Montgomery Street, Suite 800 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 200-4980 

Fax: (415) 200-4989 

cholland@hollandlawllp.com 

lholland@hollandlawllp.com 

/s/ Michael Sandonato 

Michael Sandonato (admitted pro hac vice) 

John Carlin (admitted pro hac vice) 

Christopher Gerson (admitted pro hac vice) 

Natalie Lieber (admitted pro hac vice) 

Jason Dorsky (admitted pro hac vice) 

Jonathan Sharret (admitted pro hac vice) 

Joshua Calabro (admitted pro hac vice) 

Daniel Apgar (admitted pro hac vice) 

Sean McCarthy (admitted pro hac vice) 

Robert Pickens (admitted pro hac vice) 

Caitlyn Bingaman (admitted pro hac vice) 

VENABLE LLP 

1290 Avenue of the Americas 

New York, New York, 10104 

+1 (212) 218-2100

+1 (212) 218-2200 facsimile

philipsprosecutionbar@venable.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Koninklijke Philips 

N.V. and U.S. Philips Corporation

Case 4:18-cv-01885-HSG Document 965 Filed 01/31/20 Page 4 of 9
5

STIPULATED AND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL; ORDER 

CASE NO. 4:18-CV-01885-HSG 

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 

 /s/ Christina McCullough

Judith Jennison (Bar No. 165929) Tiffany P. Cunningham (pro hac vice) 

Christina McCullough (Bar No. 245944) PERKINS COIE LLP 

Ramsey M. Al-Salam (Bar No. 109506) 131 South Dearborn, Suite 1700 

Antoine McNamara (Bar No. 261980) Chicago, Illinois, 60603 

Theresa H. Nguyen (Bar No. 284581) +1 (312) 324-8400

PERKINS COIE LLP +1 (312) 324-9400 facsimile

1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900

Seattle, Washington, 98101 Sarah E. Fowler (Bar No. 264838) 

+1 (206) 359-8000 PERKINS COIE LLP 

+1 (206) 359-9000 facsimile 3150 Porter Drive 

msft-philipsteam@perkinscoie.com Palo Alto, CA 94304 

+1 (650) 838-4300

Chad Campbell (Bar No. 258723) +1 (650) 838-4350

PERKINS COIE LLP 

2901 North Central Avenue, Suite 2000 Patrick McKeever 

Phoenix, Arizona, 85012 PERKINS COIE LLP 

+1 (602) 351-8000 11452 El Camino Real, Suite 300 

+1 (602) 648-7000 facsimile San Diego, California, 92130-2080 

+1 (858) 720-5722

+1 (858) 720-5822 facsimile

Attorneys for Intervenor-Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendants-in-Intervention Microsoft Corp. and 

Microsoft Mobile, Inc. 

Case 4:18-cv-01885-HSG Document 965 Filed 01/31/20 Page 5 of 9
6

STIPULATED AND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL; ORDER 

CASE NO. 4:18-CV-01885-HSG

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 OF DISMISSAL

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties, Plaintiffs 

Koninklijke Philips N.V. and U.S. Philips Corporation (collectively, “Philips”) and Defendants 

Microsoft Corporation and Microsoft Mobile Inc. (collectively, “Microsoft”), subject to the approval 

of the Court, that: 

1. All claims asserted by Philips against Microsoft in this action are dismissed with

prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2).

2. All claims asserted by Microsoft against Philips in this action are dismissed with

prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2).

3. Each party shall bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.

Dated: January 29, 2020 

Respectfully submitted,

Chris Holland (SBN 164053) 

Lori Holland (SBN 202309) 

HOLLAND LAW LLP 

220 Montgomery Street, Suite 800 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 200-4980 

Fax: (415) 200-4989 

cholland@hollandlawllp.com 

lholland@hollandlawllp.com 

/s/ Michael Sandonato 

Michael Sandonato (admitted pro hac vice) 

John Carlin (admitted pro hac vice) 

Christopher Gerson (admitted pro hac vice) 

Natalie Lieber (admitted pro hac vice) 

Jason Dorsky (admitted pro hac vice) 

Jonathan Sharret (admitted pro hac vice) 

Joshua Calabro (admitted pro hac vice) 

Daniel Apgar (admitted pro hac vice) 

Sean McCarthy (admitted pro hac vice) 

Robert Pickens (admitted pro hac vice) 

Caitlyn Bingaman (admitted pro hac vice) 

VENABLE LLP 

1290 Avenue of the Americas 

New York, New York, 10104 

+1 (212) 218-2100

+1 (212) 218-2200 facsimile

philipsprosecutionbar@venable.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Koninklijke Philips 

N.V. and U.S. Philips Corporation

Case 4:18-cv-01885-HSG Document 965 Filed 01/31/20 Page 6 of 9
7

STIPULATED AND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL; ORDER 

CASE NO. 4:18-CV-01885-HSG

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 

 /s/ Christina McCullough

Judith Jennison (Bar No. 165929) Tiffany P. Cunningham (pro hac vice) 

Christina McCullough (Bar No. 245944) PERKINS COIE LLP 

Ramsey M. Al-Salam (Bar No. 109506) 131 South Dearborn, Suite 1700 

Antoine McNamara (Bar No. 261980) Chicago, Illinois, 60603 

Theresa H. Nguyen (Bar No. 284581) +1 (312) 324-8400

PERKINS COIE LLP +1 (312) 324-9400 facsimile

1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900

Seattle, Washington, 98101 Sarah E. Fowler (Bar No. 264838) 

+1 (206) 359-8000 PERKINS COIE LLP 

+1 (206) 359-9000 facsimile 3150 Porter Drive 

msft-philipsteam@perkinscoie.com Palo Alto, CA 94304 

+1 (650) 838-4300

Chad Campbell (Bar No. 258723) +1 (650) 838-4350

PERKINS COIE LLP 

2901 North Central Avenue, Suite 2000 Patrick McKeever 

Phoenix, Arizona, 85012 PERKINS COIE LLP 

+1 (602) 351-8000 11452 El Camino Real, Suite 300 

+1 (602) 648-7000 facsimile San Diego, California, 92130-2080 

+1 (858) 720-5722

+1 (858) 720-5822 facsimile

Attorneys for Intervenor-Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendants-in-Intervention Microsoft Corp. and 

Microsoft Mobile, Inc. 

Case 4:18-cv-01885-HSG Document 965 Filed 01/31/20 Page 7 of 9
8

STIPULATED AND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL; ORDER 

CASE NO. 4:18-CV-01885-HSG 

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 

CIVIL L.R. 5-1(i) ATTESTATION 

I, Chris Holland, hereby attest that I have been authorized by counsel for the parties listed 

above to execute this document on their behalf. 

Dated: January 29, 2020 /s/ Chris Holland 

 Chris Holland 

Case 4:18-cv-01885-HSG Document 965 Filed 01/31/20 Page 8 of 9
9

STIPULATED AND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL; ORDER 

CASE NO. 4:18-CV-01885-HSG-EDL 

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 

 ORDER 

The Court has now considered Plaintiffs Koninklijke Philips N.V. and U.S. Philips 

Corporation (collectively, “Philips”) and Defendants Microsoft Corporation. and Microsoft Mobile 

Inc. (collectively, “Microsoft”) Stipulated and Unopposed Motion for Voluntary Dismissal (“the 

Motion”). Having considered the moving papers before it and being fully advised, the Court finds 

and orders as follows: 

The Motion is GRANTED in its entirety. The Stipulation of Dismissal filed with the 

Motion is entered as the Order of this Court, and all claims asserted by Philips against Microsoft or 

by Microsoft against Philips in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED pursuant to the terms of 

that stipulation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 1/31/2020 ____________________________________ 

Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. 

United States District Judge 

Case 4:18-cv-01885-HSG Document 965 Filed 01/31/20 Page 9 of 9