Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00162/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00162-14/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1338 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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NICHIA CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SEOUL SEMICONDUCTOR LTD., et al.,

Defendants

 /

No. C-06-0162 MMC

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF

CREATIVE LABS, INC.’S AMENDED

ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIMS;

GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO

STRIKE PORTIONS OF CREATIVE

HOLDINGS, INC.’S AMENDED ANSWER

AND COUNTERCLAIMS; GRANTING

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE

PORTIONS OF CREATIVE

TECHNOLOGY, LTD.’S CORRECTED

FIRST AMENDED ANSWER AND

COUNTERCLAIMS; GRANTING

DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR LEAVE

TO AMEND; VACATING HEARING

Before the Court are three motions filed June 27, 2006 by Nichia Corporation

(“Nichia”): (1) Nichia’s motion to strike, pursuant to Rule 12(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, portions of Creative Labs, Inc.’s (“Creative Labs”) Amended Answer and

Counterclaims; (2) Nichia’s motion to strike, pursuant to Rule 12(f), portions of Creative

Holdings, Inc.’s (“Creative Holdings”) Amended Answer and Counterclaims; and

(3) Nichia’s motion to strike, pursuant to Rule 12(f), portions of Creative Technology, Ltd.’s

(“Creative Technology”) Corrected First Amended Answer and Counterclaims. Creative

Labs, Creative Holdings, and Creative Technology (collectively “Creative Defendants”)

have filed a joint response, requesting that each such defendant be given leave to file a

Case 3:06-cv-00162-MMC Document 131 Filed 09/25/06 Page 1 of 2
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

Two of the three motions filed by Nichia are identical and refer only to the pleading

filed by Creative Labs, while the third motion is directed at the pleading filed by Creative

Technology. None of the three motions expressly references the pleading filed by Creative

Holdings. In their joint response to the motions, however, the Creative Defendants indicate

their understanding that Nichia seeks to strike portions of the pleading filed by each of the

Creative Defendants, including Creative Holdings. Nichia, in its reply, also indicates such

understanding.

2

Second Amended Answer and Counterclaims.1 Nichia has filed a single reply, stating

therein it does not oppose the request to amend.

Having considered the papers filed in support of and in response to the motions, the

Court deems the matter suitable for decision on the papers, VACATES the hearing

scheduled for September 29, 2006, and rules as follows:

1. Nichia’s motions to strike portions of Creative Labs’ Amended Answer and

Counterclaims, Creative Holdings’ Amended Answer and Counterclaims, and Creative

Technology’s Corrected First Amended Answer and Counterclaims are hereby GRANTED,

without prejudice to each such defendant’s filing, no later than October 4, 2006, a Second

Amended Answer and Counterclaims.

2. Nichia’s response to each of the above-referenced Second Amended Answer and

Counterclaims shall be filed no later than 10 court days from the date each such amended

pleading is filed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 25, 2006 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-00162-MMC Document 131 Filed 09/25/06 Page 2 of 2