Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-04871/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-04871-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
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

STIPULATION AND ORDER

PERMITTING AGILENT TO FILE AMENDED 

COUNTERCLAIMS 

(Case No. C 03-4871 JW) 

IRELL & MANELLA LLP 

Morgan Chu – mchu@irell.com (70446) 

Samuel K. Lu – slu@irell.com (171969) 

Alan J. Heinrich – aheinrich@irell.com (212782) 

Richard E. Lyon – rlyon@irell.com (229288) 

1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900 

Los Angeles, California 90067-4276 

Telephone: (310) 277-1010 

Facsimile: (310) 203-7199 

Attorneys for Plaintiff and 

Counterclaim-Defendant 

AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP 

Daralyn J. Durie (169825) 

Leo L. Lam (181861) 

Eugene M. Paige (202849) 

710 Sansome Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-1704 

Telephone: (415) 391-5400 

Facsimile: (415) 397-7188 

Attorneys for Defendant and

Counterclaim-Plaintiff 

PIXART IMAGING INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

 a Delaware corporation, 

 Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant, 

 v. 

PIXART IMAGING INC., 

 a Taiwanese corporation, 

 Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff.

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. C 03-4871 JW 

STIPULATION AND

ORDER PERMITTING AGILENT 

TECHNOLOGIES, INC. TO FILE 

AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS 

Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 147-1 Filed 11/09/2005 Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge James Ware

Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 148 Filed 11/10/05 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

STIPULATION AND ORDER

PERMITTING AGILENT TO FILE AMENDED 

COUNTERCLAIMS 

(Case No. C 03-4871 JW) - 1 - 

On October 31, 2005, PixArt Imaging Inc. ("PixArt") filed the complaint in this matter 

against Agilent Technologies, Inc. ("Agilent"), alleging that U.S. Patent No. 6,433,780 (the "'780 

patent"), which is assigned to Agilent and is entitled "Seeing Eye Mouse For A Computer 

System," is invalid and not infringed by PixArt. On December 23, 2003, Agilent filed a 

counterclaim against PixArt, alleging that the '780 patent is valid and infringed by PixArt. On 

November 5, 2004, the Court conducted a tutorial on the technology described and claimed in the 

'780 patent. On November 12, 2004, the Court conducted a claim construction hearing on the 

disputed claim terms of the '780 patent. On March 30, 2005, the Court issued a claim construction 

order on the '780 patent. 

On September 27, 2005, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued U.S. Patent 

No. 6,950,094 (the "'094 patent"), which is a continuation patent of the '780 patent. Like the '780 

patent, the '094 patent is assigned to Agilent and is entitled "Seeing Eye Mouse For A Computer 

System." The '094 patent has substantially the same specification as the '780 patent, and the 

claims of the '094 patent are very similar to, and include many of the same terms as, the claims of 

the '780 patent, which are already familiar to the Court. 

On the day the '094 patent issued, September 27, 2005, counsel for Agilent contacted 

counsel for PixArt to discuss the addition of the '094 patent to this lawsuit. The parties have 

reached agreement. Counsel for Agilent and counsel for PixArt are willing to stipulate to the 

addition of the '094 patent to this lawsuit in a manner that will not otherwise delay the scheduling 

of this case. Therefore, plaintiff and counterclaim-defendant, Agilent, and defendant and 

counterclaim-plaintiff, PixArt, through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate that Agilent may 

file Agilent Technologies, Inc.'s Answer to Complaint for Declaratory Relief and Third Amended 

Counterclaims of Agilent Technologies, Inc. (attached as Exhibit 1). 

Due to the similarity between the claims of the '094 patent and the claims of the '780 

patent, which have already been construed by the Court, Agilent does not believe further claim 

construction is required for the '094 patent.1

 While PixArt believes that is possible, PixArt cannot 

1

 Agilent understands that in printing the '094 patent, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 

introduced an error into the language of claim 5. Agilent is currently seeking a Certificate of 

Correction to correct the error and estimates that the Certificate of Correction will issue in 

Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 147-1 Filed 11/09/2005 Page 2 of 5 Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 148 Filed 11/10/05 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

STIPULATION AND ORDER

PERMITTING AGILENT TO FILE AMENDED 

COUNTERCLAIMS 

(Case No. C 03-4871 JW) - 2 - 

determine for certain whether the claims of the '094 patent require further claim construction until 

Agilent has provided its Preliminary Infringement Contentions and accompanying document 

production. In light of the possibility that further claim construction proceedings for the '094 

patent may not be necessary, the parties are willing to stipulate to a schedule of dates that will 

expedite the claim construction process for the '094 patent. The parties, through their respective 

counsel, further stipulate that (1) Agilent will serve its Preliminary Infringement Contentions for 

the '094 patent by November 21, 2005; (2) PixArt will serve notice upon Agilent of whether 

PixArt believes further claim construction proceedings are necessary ten days after service of 

Agilent's Preliminary Infringement Contentions; and, (3) the parties will meet and confer 

regarding a streamlined claim construction process if PixArt provides to Agilent notice of PixArt's 

belief that further claim construction proceedings are necessary. 

approximately three to four weeks. Agilent has represented that the claim element that contains 

the error appears in its correct form throughout the prosecution history of the '094 patent. 

Therefore, both parties are aware of how the claim element should read and will read if and when 

the Certificate of Correction issues. Moreover, claim language identical to that which contains the 

error appears in the asserted claims of the '780 patent, which have already been construed by the 

Court. Therefore, the parties do not anticipate any claim construction issues with respect to this 

claim element and are prepared to treat the claim as though the Certificate of Correction had 

already issued for purposes of the claim construction schedule outlined herein. 

Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 147-1 Filed 11/09/2005 Page 3 of 5 Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 148 Filed 11/10/05 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

STIPULATION AND ORDER

PERMITTING AGILENT TO FILE AMENDED 

COUNTERCLAIMS 

(Case No. C 03-4871 JW) - 3 - 

Dated: November 9, 2005 IRELL & MANELLA LLP

By: /s/ Richard E. Lyon 

 Richard E. Lyon 

 Attorneys for and Plaintiff 

 Counterclaim-Defendant 

 AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

Dated: November 9, 2005 KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP 

By: /s/ Eugene M. Paige 

 Eugene M. Paige 

 Attorneys for and Defendant 

 Counterclaim-Plaintiff 

 PIXART IMAGING INC. 

I hereby attest, pursuant to section X of General Order 45, that concurrence in the filing of 

this document has been obtained from Eugene M. Paige, Esq., Attorney for Defendant and 

Counterclaim-Plaintiff PixArt Imaging Inc. 

Dated: November 9, 2005 By: Richard E. Lyon 

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 147-1 Filed 11/09/2005 Page 4 of 5 Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 148 Filed 11/10/05 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

STIPULATION AND ORDER

PERMITTING AGILENT TO FILE AMENDED 

COUNTERCLAIMS 

(Case No. C 03-4871 JW) - 4 - 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Agilent may file Agilent 

Technologies, Inc.'s Answer to Complaint for Declaratory Relief and Third Amended 

Counterclaims of Agilent Technologies, Inc. It is further ordered that (1) Agilent serve its 

Preliminary Infringement Contentions for the '094 patent by November 21, 2005; (2) PixArt serve 

notice upon Agilent of whether PixArt believes further claim construction proceedings are 

necessary ten days after service of Agilent's Preliminary Infringement Contentions; and, (3) the 

parties will meet and confer regarding a streamlined claim construction process if PixArt provides 

to Agilent notice of PixArt's belief that further claim construction proceedings are necessary. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 

 HONORABLE JAMES WARE 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 147-1 Filed 11/09/2005 Page 5 of 5

November 10, 2005

Case 5:03-cv-04871-JW Document 148 Filed 11/10/05 Page 5 of 5