Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03923/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03923-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Patent Infringement

---

DECHERT LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

PALO ALTO

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 [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING 

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT; CASE NO: C04-03923 MMC (JCS) 9929233.1.LIT

Chris Scott Graham (State Bar No. 114498)

chris.scott.graham@dechert.com

Michael N. Edelman (State Bar No. 180948)

michael.edelman@dechert.com

DECHERT LLP

975 Page Mill Road

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1013

Telephone: 650.813.4800

Facsimile: 650.813.4848

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant,

SYNOPSYS, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

SYNOPSYS, INC., a Delaware corporation,

Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant,

v.

MAGMA DESIGN AUTOMATION, a 

Delaware corporation,

Defendant and Counter-Claimant.

Case No. C-04-03923 MMC (JCS)

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER PERMITTING SYNOPSYS, 

INC. TO FILE THIRD AMENDED 

COMPLAINT

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS

WHEREAS, On June 21, 2005, Magma filed its Motion to Dismiss the Third Cause of 

Action to Strike (the "Motion to Dismiss and Strike");

WHEREAS, by the court’s Order dated July 15, 2005, the Third Cause of Action of the 

Second Amended Complaint was dismissed with leave to amend, and the motion to strike 

pursuant to 12(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was granted;

WHEREAS, Synopsys is prepared to file a third amended complaint that is responsive to 

the Order dated July 15, 2005, and to file a motion for leave to amend to include the additional 

allegations that were subject to the Order dated July 15, 2005;

/ / / 

Case 3:04-cv-03923-MMC Document 367 Filed 08/03/05 Page 1 of 3
DECHERT LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

PALO ALTO

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 [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING 2

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT; CASE NO: C04-03923 MMC (JCS) 9929233.1.LIT

WHEREAS, both Synopsys and Magma wish to avoid the delay and cost inherent in 

briefing the motion for leave to amend;

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, pursuant to Civil Local 

Rule 6-1 by and between Synopsys and Magma, as follows:

1. With the court’s permission Synopsys shall file its Third Amended Complaint in 

the form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”;

2. Magma shall file its responsive pleading no later than 30 days after electronic 

service of the Third Amended Complaint. Magma, at its option, may answer or otherwise 

challenge any part or all of the Third Amended Complaint by motion; provided, however, that 

Magma agrees not to move to strike the allegations set forth in paragraphs 29, 42-44, 48, 57, 70, 

78, 84-90, 103-113 and 137-140 of the Second Amended Complaint as identified in the Order 

dated July 15, 2005 on the grounds that Synopsys was not granted leave to add those allegations 

to its complaint;

3. Synopsys will not allege in this action as a basis for the fraud claim or fraudulent

concealment either the statements alleged to have been made by Magma at the February 1998 

meeting or in the April 30, 1998 letter; provided, however, that nothing in this Stipulationshall

be deemed to be a waiver of either party's right to introduce or object to the admissibility of 

evidence on any matter in this action, including but not limited to evidence relating to the

February 1998 meeting or the April 30, 1998 meeting or letter.

Dated: August 2, 2005 DECHERT LLP

By: /s/ Chris Scott Graham

Chris Scott Graham

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant,

SYNOPSYS, INC.

Dated: August 2, 2005 O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

By: /s/ Peter Obstler

Peter Obstler

Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-Claimant,

MAGMA DESIGN AUTOMATION, INC.

Case 3:04-cv-03923-MMC Document 367 Filed 08/03/05 Page 2 of 3
DECHERT LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

PALO ALTO

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 [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING 3

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT; CASE NO: C04-03923 MMC (JCS) 9929233.1.LIT

I declare under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has 

been obtained from Peter Obstler.

Dated: August 2, 2005 DECHERT LLP

By: /s/ Chris Scott Graham

Chris Scott Graham

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant,

SYNOPSYS, INC

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ____________, 2005

_________________________________

HON. MAXINE M. CHESNEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

August 3

Case 3:04-cv-03923-MMC Document 367 Filed 08/03/05 Page 3 of 3