Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-05145/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-05145-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114 Trademark 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 

STIP. AND PROPOSED ORDER TO CONTINUANCE Oracle Corp. v. Oracle Surveillance Systems, Ltd.

OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION RE PRIORITY OF USE Case No. C-04-05145 CRB 

TOWNSEND AND TOWNSEND AND CREW LLP 

James G. Gilliland, Jr. (State Bar No. 107988) 

Gregory S. Gilchrist (State Bar No. 111536) 

Timothy R. Cahn (State Bar No.162136) 

Elizabeth R. Gosse (State Bar No. 215494) 

Two Embarcadero Center, 8th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94111 

Telephone: (415) 576-0200 

Facsimile: (415) 576-0300 

Email: jggilliland@townsend.com, gsgilchrist@townsend.com; trcahn@townsend.com; 

ergosse@townsend.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

ORACLE USA, INC.

and ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION 

Karen Scarr (State Bar No. 172378) 

ORACLE CORPORATION 

500 Oracle Parkway, M.S. 5OP7 

Redwood City, California 94065 

Telephone: (650) 506-5200 

Facsimile: (650) 506-7114 

Email: karen.scarr@oracle.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

ORACLE USA, INC.

and ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

ORACLE USA, INC., a Colorado corporation, 

and ORACLE INTERNATIONAL 

CORPORATION, a California corporation, 

Plaintiffs,

v.

ORACLE SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS, 

LTD., a Maryland corporation,

Defendant.

 Case No. C-04-5145 CRB

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

TO CONTINUANCE OF SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT MOTION RE PRIORITY OF 

USE AND REFERRAL TO MAGISTRATE 

JUDGE FOR SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE 
 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 

STIP. AND PROPOSED ORDER TO CONTINUANCE OF 1 Oracle Corp. v. Oracle Surveillance Systems, Ltd.

SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION RE PRIORITY OF USE Case No. C-04-05145 CRB

The parties stipulate to the following adjustments to the briefing and hearing schedule relating 

to anticipated motions for summary judgment related to priority of trademark use. The parties request 

the postponement because they have not completed their early ADR session and wish to do so, in the 

hope it will be productive, before completion of discovery that defendant/counterclaimant wants to 

take relating to the anticipated motion. 

Current Date Proposed Date

August 19, 2005 - motion due October 7, 2005 

September 16, 2005 - opposition due November 4, 2005 

September 23, 2005 - reply due November 18, 2005 

October 7, 2005 - hearing December 2, 2005 

This schedule is proposed as one alternative that would accommodate the parties' objectives. 

Should the Court prefer a different schedule, the parties are of course amenable, but respectfully ask 

that the Court select a hearing date that does not conflict with the schedule of the lawyers who expect 

to appear. At present, there are no conflicts on Fridays within two weeks either side of December 2, 

noting that the Court is closed on November 25, 2005. 

In addition, the parties selected a settlement conference before a Magistrate Judge as their 

preferred ADR option and stipulate to an order referring them to such a conference. 

DATED: August 9, 2005 TOWNSEND AND TOWNSEND AND CREW LLP 

By:_/s/Gregory S. Gilchrist______________________________

 Gregory S. Gilchrist 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

ORACLE USA, INC. and ORACLE 

INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION 

DATED: August 9, 2005 KATTEN MUCHIN ROSENMAN LLP 

 By:_/s/Michael F. Sarney______________________________ Michael F. Sarney 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

 ORACLE SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS, LTD. 
 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 

STIP. AND PROPOSED ORDER TO CONTINUANCE OF 2 Oracle Corp. v. Oracle Surveillance Systems, Ltd.

SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION RE PRIORITY OF USE Case No. C-04-05145 CRB

PROPOSED ORDER

 Good cause appearing, it is ordered that the schedule for the parties' summary judgment 

motions related to priority of trademark use shall be adjusted as follows: 

Current Date New Date

August 19, 2005 - motion due October 7 , 2005 

September 16, 2005 - opposition due November 4, 2005 

September 23, 2005 - reply due November 18, 2005 

 October 7, 2005 - hearing December 2, 2005

 The parties are referred to a settlement conference before a Magistrate Judge, to be scheduled 

as soon practicable by the ADR department for completion of the parties' obligations under the early 

ADR Program. 

Dated: August ___, 2005. 

 _______________________________________________ 

 Honorable Charles R. Breyer 

 United States District Judge 

60555608 v1

15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

APPROVED

Judge Charles R. Breyer