Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_02-cv-04833/USCOURTS-cand-5_02-cv-04833-18/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

Case No. C02-4833 JF 

STIPULATION RE: FURTHER HEARING ON BROADCOM’S MOTION TO MODIFY THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

A/72298743.2

BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP 

JAMES B. LEWIS (SBN 71669) 

WILLIAM F. ABRAMS (SBN 88805) 

RUBY M. WAYNE (SBN 229538) 

1900 University Avenue 

East Palo Alto, California 94303-2223 

Telephone: (650) 849-4400 

Facsimile: (650) 849-4800 

james.lewis@bingham.com 

william.abrams@bingham.com 

ruby.wayne@bingham.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

TOWNSHEND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, L.L.C., 

A California L.L.C. 

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 

JAMES POOLEY (SBN 058041) 

L. SCOTT OLIVER (SBN 174824) 

DIANA LUO (SBN 233712) 

755 Page Mill Road 

Palo Alto, California 94304-1018 

Telephone: (650) 813-5600 

Facsimile: (650) 494-0792 

jpooley@mofo.com 

soliver@mofo.com 

dluo@mofo.com 

Attorneys for Third Party Intervenor 

BROADCOM CORPORATION, 

A California Corporation 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

In re TOWNSHEND PATENT LITIGATION No. C02-4833 JF (PVT) 

STIPULATION RE: FURTHER 

HEARING ON BROADCOM’S 

MOTION TO MODIFY THE 

PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Judge: Hon. Patricia V. Trumbull 

ORDER ON

Case 5:02-cv-04833-JF Document 643 Filed 01/31/08 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

2 Case No. C02-4833 JF 

STIPULATION RE: FURTHER HEARING ON BROADCOM’S MOTION TO MODIFY THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

A/72298743.2

Pursuant to Northern District Local Rule 7-12, Townshend Intellectual Property, LLC 

and Broadcom Corporation (collectively “the Parties”) hereby submit this Stipulation regarding 

further hearing on Broadcom’s motion to modify the Protective Order from In re Townshend 

Patent Litigation (also referred to as the “prior litigation”): 

WHEREAS, on September 25, 2007, counsel for Townshend and Broadcom appeared 

before the Court on Broadcom’s Motion to Intervene and Modify the Protective Order in In re 

Townshend Patent Litigation;

WHEREAS, on September 27, 2007, the Court granted Broadcom’s motion to intervene, 

and ordered the Parties to continue to meet and confer on the scope of the proposed 

modifications to the protective order; 

WHEREAS, on October 23, 2007, the Parties submitted to the Court their Stipulation 

Regarding Broadcom’s Motion to Intervene and Modify the Protective Order (“October 23rd 

Stipulation”) describing the Parties’ meet and confer efforts, proposing modifications to the 

Stipulated Protective Order from the prior litigation (“Prior Protective Order”), and requesting a 

continuance of the previously scheduled October 23, 2007 hearing regarding Broadcom’s motion 

to modify the Prior Protective Order to November 8, 2007 so that the Parties could continue their 

meet and confer efforts to resolve the issues without need for the Court’s further intervention; 

WHEREAS, on October 23, 2007, the Court adopted the Parties’ proposed modifications 

in the October 23rd Stipulation as part of the Prior Protective Order and continued the previously 

scheduled October 23, 2007 hearing to November 8, 2007; 

WHEREAS, counsel for Townshend and Broadcom have since further exchanged 

correspondence disclosing Agere (now LSI Corporation) and/or Zhone Technologies, Inc. (the 

successor to AT&T Paradyne) Section 102(g) documents retained by counsel for each of the 

Parties from the prior litigation; 

WHEREAS, pursuant to the October 23rd Stipulation, the Parties are working to produce 

in the Townshend v. Broadcom (Case No. 06-05118 JF (RS)) litigation (also referred to as the 

“current litigation”) Agere and/or AT&T Paradyne documents from prior litigation identified to 

be in counsel’s possession to the extent possible without compromising the work product 

Case 5:02-cv-04833-JF Document 643 Filed 01/31/08 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

3 Case No. C02-4833 JF 

STIPULATION RE: FURTHER HEARING ON BROADCOM’S MOTION TO MODIFY THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

A/72298743.2

doctrine, attorney-client privilege, and/or any other privilege or protection that may apply; 

WHEREAS, after confirming with counsel for Broadcom that the November 8th hearing 

was not necessary in light of the Parties’ progress, counsel for Townshend, on November 5th, 

notified the Court’s Clerk that the hearing should be taken off calendar; 

WHEREAS, the Parties believe at this time that they can continue to resolve relevant 

issues through meet and confers, and without further intervention by the Court; 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the Parties, and through their respective 

attorneys of record, as follows: 

In the current litigation, the Parties shall produce, consistent with the October 23rd 

Stipulation, the Agere and/or Zhone Section 102(g) documents from the prior litigation that were 

disclosed by each Party to be in the possession of their counsel that are not protected by privilege 

and are not work product; 

The Parties reserve all rights to take all necessary precautions, including but not limited 

to redacting any attorney notes that may appear on third-party documents, and withholding 

memoranda authored by attorneys, to ensure that such production does not compromise the 

attorney work product doctrine, attorney client privilege, and/or any other privilege or protection 

that may apply; 

In the event that a dispute should arise and Court intervention is deemed necessary, the 

Parties reserve all rights to seek the Court’s assistance in resolving disputes within the Court’s 

jurisdiction that arise from Broadcom’s Motion to Intervene and Modify the Protective Order in 

In re Townshend Patent Litigation or the October 23rd Stipulation. 

Case 5:02-cv-04833-JF Document 643 Filed 01/31/08 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

4 Case No. C02-4833 JF 

STIPULATION RE: FURTHER HEARING ON BROADCOM’S MOTION TO MODIFY THE PROTECTIVE ORDER

A/72298743.2

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: _________________, 2007 

 ________________________________ 

The Honorable Patricia V. Trumbull 

DATED: December 4, 2007 

By: /s/ Ruby M. Wayne 

Ruby M. Wayne 

ruby.wayne@bingham.com 

BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

TOWNSHEND INTELLECTUAL 

PROPERTY, LLC 

DATED: December 4, 2007 

By: /s/ Diana Luo 

Diana Luo 

dluo@mofo.com 

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 

Attorneys for Defendant 

BROADCOM CORPORATION

1/31 X 8

Case 5:02-cv-04833-JF Document 643 Filed 01/31/08 Page 4 of 4