Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-04656/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-04656-21/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright Infringement

---

ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER 

&

CIRESI L.L.P. 

ATTORNEYS 

AT 

LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

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 

LA1 60147648.1 APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY

Case No. C 05-4656 PJH

Robert F. Hinton, Bar No. 98110 

RFHinton@rkmc.com 

David Martinez, Bar No. 193183 

DMartinez@rkmc.com 

Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. 

2049 Century Park East, Suite 3400 

Los Angeles, CA 90067-3208 

Telephone: 310-552-0130 

Facsimile: 310-229-5800 

Attorneys for Defendants 

BEST BUY ENTERPRISE SERVICES, INC. and 

BEST BUY CO., INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IDENTITY ARTS, a California Limited 

Liability Company, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

BEST BUY ENTERPRISE SERVICES, 

INC., a Minnesota Corporation, BEST 

BUY CO., INC., a Minnesota Corporation 

and DOES 1 through 100 inclusive, 

Defendants. 

Case No. C 05-4656 PJH 

 related to 

Case No. C 06-1631 PJH 

[Assigned For All Purposes To The Honorable 

Phyllis J. Hamilton] 

DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO 

FILE SUR-REPLY RE: STAY ISSUE RE:

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF 

JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO RULE 54(B) 

Date: August 8, 2007 

Time: 9:00 a.m. 

Courtroom: 3 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 4:05-cv-04656-PJH Document 133 Filed 07/24/07 Page 1 of 2
ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER 

&

CIRESI L.L.P. 

ATTORNEYS 

AT 

LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

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 

LA1 60147648.1 - 2 - APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY

Case No. C 05-4656 PJH

Defendants respectfully seek permission to file a two-page Sur-Reply for the exclusive 

purpose of addressing misstatements of law in Plaintiff’s Reply on the issue of whether the Court 

should stay the single remaining cause of action pending resolution of the dismissed Copyright 

claims. 

Leave to file a Sur-Reply is also warranted because, although the stay issue is related to 

the Court’s analysis under F.R.C.P. 54(b), Plaintiff did not address the issue in its moving papers 

and instead addressed it for the first time in its Reply of July 20, 2007. See generally Doe v. 

University of Cal., 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12876, No. C-92-2284 SAW, at * 4 (N.D.Cal. 

September 8, 1993) (“If a district court certifies claims for appeal pursuant to Rule 54(b), it 

should stay all proceedings on the remaining claims if the interests of efficiency and fairness are 

served by doing so.”). 

The hearing on this matter is set for August 8, 2007. Defendants propose to file said SurReply immediately upon the grant of leave to do so and thus well in advance of the hearing. 1

DATED: July 23, 2007 ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER & CIRESI L.L.P. 

By: /S/ Robert F. Hinton 

Robert F. Hinton 

David Martinez 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS 

BEST BUY ENTERPRISE SERVICES, INC. 

AND BEST BUY CO., INC.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

Defendants’ request to file a two-page Sur-Reply for consideration by the Court in 

connection with Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Judgment Pursuant to Rule 54(b) is granted. 

Defendants are ordered to file said Sur-Reply immediately. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: July ___, 2007 __________________________________ 

 HONORABLE PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON 

United States District Court Judge 

 

1

 Plaintiff was provided advance notice of this application. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

DENIED

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton

24

Case 4:05-cv-04656-PJH Document 133 Filed 07/24/07 Page 2 of 2