Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-02000/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-02000-64/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 CALIFORNIA

MONOLITHIC POWER SYSTEMS, INC.

Plaintiff, No. 04-2000 CW (EDL)

v. ORDER GRANTING MPS, ASMC,

ASUSTEK, AND HSING’S MOTION FOR

ISSUANCE OF THIRD PARTY SUBPOENA

PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1783

 O2 MICRO INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,

Defendant. ___________________________________

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS AND

CROSS-CLAIMS.

___________________________________/

The Court has reviewed Movants MPS, ASMC, ASUSTEK and Hsing’s administrative motion

for issuance of third-party subpoena to Kwang Hua Liu pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1783, O2 Micro’s

Response thereto, and the reply papers. O2 Micro points out correctly that the Movants did not follow

the proper procedure by presenting its request for issuance of a subpoena as a motion for administrative

relief. The Court nonetheless recognizes the urgency of the timing and need for an immediate decision,

and construes the administrative motion as a motion for shortened time, grants the request for shortened

time, and concludes that the papers on file are sufficient to decide the issues presented. The Court

cautions the parties, however, that in the future, such improper administrative motions will not be

entertained.

Movants have demonstrated that, under the circumstances presented to the Court, the issuance

of a subpoena pursuant to § 1783 to compel Dr. Kwang Hua Liu’s appearance at a deposition in the

Case 4:04-cv-02000-CW Document 649 Filed 12/14/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 before January 1, 2007, is necessary in the interest of justice. As Taiwan is not a

signatory to the Hague Convention, service of the subpoena shall be effected in accordance with Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(2)(C)(ii). See Trueposition, Inc. v. Sunon, Inc., 2006 WL 1686635 at *5-6

(E.D. Pa., June 14, 2006); Power Integrations, Inc. v. System General Corp., 2004 WL 2806168, at *1

(N.D.Cal. Dec. 7, 2004). Movants shall prepare the subpoena for issuance by the Clerk of Court,

designating the time and place for Dr. Liu’s appearance, and shall provide the Clerk of Court with an

address label and appropriate postage for Global Express international mail/return receipt requested,

addressed to Dr. Liu at his Taiwan address. The Clerk of Court shall deposit the subpoena in the U.S.

Mail. Movants shall also serve a copy of the subpoena on Dr. Liu’s local counsel at Fenwick & West.

As the parties have represented to the Court that Dr. Liu has already planned a visit to California

between December 22, 2006 and January 1, 2007, the Court finds that payment of attendance fees and

local mileage in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1821 is sufficient to reimburse Dr. Liu’s local travel and

attendance expenses related to the deposition. The Court estimates these expenses to total $100, without

prejudice to allowing Dr. Liu to demonstrate a higher amount of expenses. Movants shall tender this

amount to Dr. Liu on the day of the deposition.

This order disposes of Docket No. 618.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 14, 2006 _______________________________

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:04-cv-02000-CW Document 649 Filed 12/14/06 Page 2 of 2