Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-02009/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-02009-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 15:1126 Patent Infringement

---

3

4

5

6

7

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

IRELL & MANELLA LLP

Morgan Chu (70446)

Richard M. Birnholz (151543)

Laura W. Brill (195889)

Alan J. Heinrich (212782)

1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900

Los Angeles, California 90067-4276

Telephone: (310) 277-1010

Facsimile: (310) 203-7199

Attorneys for Defendant

IMMERSION CORPORATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

INTERNET SERVICES, LLC, a California ) Case No. 4:06-CV-02009-CW

Limited Liability Company, )

) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

Plaintiff-Counterclaim ) ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

Defendant, )

)

v. ) CTRM: Hon. Claudia Wilken

IMMERSION CORPORATION, a Delaware )

corporation, )

)

Defendant-Counterclaim )

Plaintiff. )

)

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5, attached hereto is the Stipulation and

Proposed Order Selecting ADR Process.

Dated: August 3, 2006 Respectfully submitted,

IRELL & MANELLA LLP

By: /s/ Richard M. Birnholz

2<r Richard M. Birnholz

Attorneys for Defendant

0 , IMMERSION CORPORATION 26

27

28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING

ADR PROCESS

1545585 -1-

Case 4:06-cv-02009-CW Document 31 Filed 08/10/06 Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Internet Services, LLC,

Plaintiffs),

v.

Immersion Corporation,

CASE NO. 4:06-CV-02009-CW

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

Defendant(s).

/

Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the

following stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5:

The parties agree to participate in the following ADR process:

Court Processes:

Non-binding Arbitration (ADR L.R. 4)

Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5)

Mediation (ADR L.R. 6)

(Note: Parties who believe that an early settlement conference with a Magistrate Judge is

appreciably more likely to meet their needs than any other form of ADR, must participate in an

ADR phone conference and may not file this form. They must instead file a Notice of Need for

ADR Phone Conference. See Civil Local Rule 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5)

Private Process:

>/ Private ADR (please identify process and provider) JAMS (or other provider to be

mutually agreed upon)

The parties agree to hold the ADR session by:

J the presumptive deadline (The deadline is 90 days from the date of the order

referring the case to an ADR process unless otherwise ordered.)

other requested deadline

Dated: August 3,2006

Dated: August 3,2006

Matthias A. Kamber

Attorney for Plaintiff Internet Services, LLC

Richard M. Bimholz

Attorney for Defendant Immersion Corporation

Case 4:06-cv-02009-CW Document 31 Filed 08/10/06 Page 2 of 3
[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the Stipulation above, the captioned matter is hereby referred to:

Non-binding Arbitration

Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE)

Mediation

/ Private ADR

Deadline for ADR session

•S 90 days from the date of this order,

other

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8/10/06

Case 4:06-cv-02009-CW Document 31 Filed 08/10/06 Page 3 of 3