Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-05679/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-05679-2/pdf.json

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

STIPULATION 

CASE NO. 5:09-CV-05679-JF 

DARIN W. SNYDER (S.B. #136003) 

dsnyder@omm.com 

LUANN L. SIMMONS (S.B. #203526) 

lsimmons@omm.com 

DAVID J. SEPANIK (S.B. #221527) 

dsepanik@omm.com 

HARRISON A. WHITMAN (S.B. #261008) 

hwhitman@omm.com 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94111-3823 

Telephone: (415) 984-8700 

Facsimile: (415) 984-8701 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Artifex Software Inc. 

RAGESH K. TANGRI (S.B. #159477) 

rtangri@durietangri.com 

JOSEPH C. GRATZ (S.B. #240676) 

jgratz@durietangri.com 

DURIE TANGRI LLP 

217 Leidesdorff Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 362-6666 

Facsimile: (415) 236-6300 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Palm Inc. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

ARTIFEX SOFTWARE INC., a California 

corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

PALM INC., a Delaware corporation, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 5:09-cv-05679-JF 

STIPULATION REGARDING DISCOVERY 

SCHEDULE 

Case 5:09-cv-05679-JF Document 23 Filed 08/24/10 Page 1 of 3
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 

CASE NO. 5:09-CV-05679-JF 

STIPULATION 

Plaintiff Artifex Software Inc. (“Artifex”), on the one hand, and defendant Palm Inc. 

(“Palm”) on the other hand, by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby agree and 

stipulate as follows: 

WHEREAS, the parties submitted a proposed case schedule in their joint 26(f) report 

(Docket No. 18); 

WHEREAS, the Court adopted the proposed schedule (Docket No. 20); 

WHEREAS, the parties have been engaged in discussions in an effort to resolve this 

matter, including participation in an Early Neutral Evaluation pursuant to this Court’s ADR 

Rules; 

WHEREAS, the parties engaged in only limited discovery during the pendency of their 

discussions; 

WHEREAS, the parties are still engaged in discussions in an effort to resolve this matter; 

NOW THEREFORE, the parties, through their respective counsel of record, agree and 

stipulate to: 

(a) extend merits discovery until September 17, 2010; 

(b) set expert disclosures for October 18, 2010; 

(c) set expert rebuttal reports for November 16, 2010; 

(d) set expert discovery cutoff for December 8, 2010; 

(e) all other dates set in the Court’s Order (Docket No. 20) remain the same. 

Case 5:09-cv-05679-JF Document 23 Filed 08/24/10 Page 2 of 3
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 

2 

STIPULATION 

CASE NO. 5:09-CV-05679-JF 

Dated: August 17, 2010 DARIN W. SNYDER 

O’MELVENY & MYERS, LLP 

By: /s/ Darin W. Snyder 

 Darin W. Snyder 

Attorneys for Artifex Software Inc. 

 

Dated: August 17, 2010 RAGESH K. TANGRI 

DURIE TANGRI LLP 

By: /s/ Ragesh K. Tangri 

 Ragesh K. Tangri 

Attorneys for Palm Inc. 

ATTESTATION

 Pursuant to General Order No. 45 X(B), I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of 

this document has been obtained from Ragesh K. Tangri. 

 By:__/s/ Darin W. Snyder ________

 Darin W. Snyder 

DATED: _______________________________ 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 

 _______________________________________ 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

8/18/10

Case 5:09-cv-05679-JF Document 23 Filed 08/24/10 Page 3 of 3