Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04478/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04478-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:501 Copyright 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 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

O2MICRO, INC., et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

YUNGFENG LI, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 14-cv-04478-EDL 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 

 On October 6, 2014, Plaintiff O2Micro, a California company, filed this complaint for 

copyright infringement, computer fraud and abuse, breach of contract, conversion, trespass, and 

related claims brought against two former employees and their subsequent employer for theft of 

trade secret source code. All of the Defendants are residents of China. 

 During a case management conference on January 6, 2015, Plaintiff stated that service of 

process on the defendants would be complete within 90 days. The Court therefore continued the 

case management conference to May 5, 2015 to allow time for service. During the May 5, 2015 

case management conference, Plaintiff stated that the corporate defendant had been served and 

would respond to the complaint by the end of June. Plaintiff also stated that he recently located 

addresses for the individual Plaintiffs and hoped to serve them within the week (i.e., early May). 

The Court therefore continued the case management conference to July 7, 2015 with a case 

management conference statement due on June 30, 2015. Plaintiff did not file a case management 

conference statement and did not appear at the case management conference. No proofs of 

service or executed waivers have been filed and no Defendant has appeared despite Plaintiff’s 

repeated assurances that Defendants were being served. 

 Accordingly, Plaintiff is ordered to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed 

for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Plaintiff”s response to 

Case 3:14-cv-04478-EDL Document 16 Filed 07/07/15 Page 1 of 2
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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

this Order to Show Cause shall be due no later than July 14, 2015. If Plaintiff fails to file a 

response to this Order to Show Cause by July 14, 2015, the Court will dismiss the action without 

prejudice for failure to prosecute. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: July 7, 2015 

______________________________________ 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:14-cv-04478-EDL Document 16 Filed 07/07/15 Page 2 of 2