Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00897/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00897-2/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 

-1- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CMC 

CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00897-SI 

Bruce J. Zabarauskas, SBN. 248601 

THOMPSON & KNIGHT LLP 

707 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 4100 

Los Angeles, California 90017 

Telephone: (310) 203-6902 

Facsimile: (310) 203-6980 

Email: bruce.zabarauskas@tklaw.com 

Justin S. Cohen (pro hac vice) 

Richard L. Wynne, Jr. (pro hac vice) 

THOMPSON & KNIGHT LLP 

1722 Routh Street, Suite 1500 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

Telephone: (214)969-1700 

Facsimile: (214)969-1751 

Email: justin.cohen@tklaw.com 

Email: richard.wynne@tklaw.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & 

SULLIVAN, LLP 

John M. Neukom (275887) 

Andrew M. Holmes (260475) 

50 California Street, 22nd Floor 

San Francisco, California 94111 

Telephone: (415) 875-6600 

Facsimile: (415)875-6700 

Email: johnneukom@quinnemanuel.com

Email: drewholmes@quinnemanuel.com

Attorneys for Defendant 

Fortinet, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

CHRIMAR SYSTEMS, INC., et al., 

 Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

FORTINET, INC., 

 Defendant. 

 

Case No. 3:16-cv-00897-SI 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO 

RESCHEDULE CASE MANAGEMENT 

CONFERENCE

 In accordance with Civil Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiffs Chrimar Systems, Inc. and 

Chrimar Holding Company (collectively, “Chrimar”) and Defendant Fortinet, Inc. (“Fortinet”), 

by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 

On July 1, 2015, Chrimar filed suit against various defendants in the Eastern District of 

Texas alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,155,012, 8,942,107, 8,902,760, and 9,019,838 

(collectively, the “Patents-in-Suit”). 

Four of the cases have been transferred to the Northern District of California, and are 

Case 3:16-cv-00897-SI Document 42 Filed 04/18/16 Page 1 of 5
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- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CMC 

CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00897-SI 

presently before this Court: Chrimar Systems, Inc. et al. v. Juniper Networks, Inc., Case No. 3:16-

cv-00558-SI (N.D. Cal.); Chrimar Systems, Inc. et al. v. Ruckus Wireless, Inc., Case No. 3:16-cv186-SI (N.D. Cal.); Chrimar Systems, Inc. et al. v. NETGEAR, Inc., Case No. 3:16-cv-624-SI 

(N.D. Cal.); Chrimar Systems, Inc. et al. v. Fortinet, Inc., Case No. 3:16-cv-00897-SI (N.D. Cal.) 

(collectively, the “N.D. Cal. Chrimar Cases”). 

On March 24, 2016, the Court entered STIPULATION AND ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE [Dkt. No. 36], setting the Case Management Conference (“CMC”) 

for the four transferred cases to April 22, 2016. 

Chrimar’s lead counsel has developed a conflict with the April 22, 2016 CMC setting. In 

particular, in related litigation currently pending in the Eastern District of Texas, Chrimar is 

subject to an April 25, 2016, deadline for the close of fact discovery. At the time it submitted the 

previous stipulation setting the CMC for April 22, Chrimar believed that the depositions in the 

Texas case could be scheduled so as to not interfere with the CMC. Since that time, however, 

Chrimar has learned that because of witness availability issues, two depositions in the Texas case 

must proceed on April 22 in Dallas, Texas. Because of those depositions, Chrimar’s lead counsel, 

Justin Cohen, and associate counsel, Richard Wynne, are unavailable to attend the CMC on that 

date. 

While mindful of this Court’s scheduling, rather that requesting leave to proceed with the 

CMC without the presence of lead counsel, Chrimar contacted the Defendants in each of the N.D. 

Cal. Chrimar Cases to inquire about rescheduling the CMC. Counsel for the parties in all of the 

N.D. Cal. Chrimar Cases have conferred and are agreeable to continuing the CMC until a date 

when Chrimar’s lead counsel is available. 

Having discussed the matter, the parties in all N.D. Cal. Chrimar Cases are available for a 

CMC on May 13, 2016. Accordingly, if the Court’s schedule permits, counsel for the parties in 

this action have agreed to reschedule the CMC currently set for April 22, 2016, to May 13, 2016, 

at 2:30 p.m. 

Because the Court has not entered a Scheduling Order in any of the four N.D. Cal. 

Chrimar Cases, the requested time modification will have no effect on the schedule for this or any 

Case 3:16-cv-00897-SI Document 42 Filed 04/18/16 Page 2 of 5
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- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CMC 

CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00897-SI 

of the cases. 

IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND STIPULATED, that the CMC in this case shall be 

rescheduled to May 13, 2016, at 2:30 p.m. and the related deadlines for filing a joint CMC 

statement is adjusted to May 6, 2016. Further, the parties shall file either a Stipulation to ADR 

Process or Notice of Need for ADR Phone Conference not later than April 22, 2016. 

Respectfully submitted, Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Richard L. Wynne, Jr. 

Richard L. Wynne, Jr. 

Thompson & Knight LLP 

Counsel for Plaintiffs 

/s/John M. Neukom w/ perm R. Wynne 

John M. Neukom 

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & 

SULLIVAN LLP 

Counsel for Defendant Fortinet, Inc. 

Case 3:16-cv-00897-SI Document 42 Filed 04/18/16 Page 3 of 5
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- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CMC 

CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00897-SI 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Case No. 3:16-cv-00897-SI 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

 I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 

and not a party to the within action. My business address is 707 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 4100, Los 

Angeles, CA 90017. On April 12, 2016 I served documents described as follows: 

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Reschedule Case Management Conference 

 I served the document listed above on the interested parties below, using the following 

means: 

 [X] (By Court’s CM/ECF System) Pursuant to Local Rule, I electronically filed 

the documents with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which 

sent notification of that filing to the persons listed on the CM/ECF service list. 

 I declare under penalty of perjury under 28 U.S.C. § 1746 that the foregoing is true and 

correct. 

Executed on April 12, 2016, at Los Angeles, California. 

/s/ Bruce J. Zabarauskas 

 Bruce J. Zabarauskas 

Case 3:16-cv-00897-SI Document 42 Filed 04/18/16 Page 4 of 5
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 

-5- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CMC 

CASE NO. 3:16-CV-00897-SI 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: __________, 2016 

THE HONORABLE SUSAN ILLSTON 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

4/18

Case 3:16-cv-00897-SI Document 42 Filed 04/18/16 Page 5 of 5