Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-02201/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-02201-19/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Iconix, Inc.
Counter-defendant
Netpickle, Inc.
Counter-claimant
Jia Shen
Counter-claimant
Lance Tokuda
Counter-claimant

Document Text:

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

OHS West:260155312.1

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING

CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL

C06-02201 SBA

I. NEEL CHATTERJEE (STATE BAR NO. 173985)

nchatterjee@orrick.com

MICHAEL APARICIO (STATE BAR NO. 206300)

maparicio@orrick.com

DANIEL J. WEINBERG (STATE BAR NO. 227159)

dweinberg@orrick.com

ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP

1000 Marsh Road

Menlo Park, CA 94025

Telephone: 650-614-7400

Facsimile: 650-614-7401

Attorneys for Defendants

LANCE TOKUDA, JIA SHEN, AND NETPICKLE, INC.

KENNETH A. KUWAYTI (CA BAR NO. 145384)

ERIC S. WALTERS (CA BAR NO. 151933)

kkuwayti@mofo.com

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

744 Page Mill Rd.

Palo Alto CA 94304-1018

Telephone: 650-813-5600

Facsimile: 650-494-0792

Attorneys for Plaintiff/Cross-defendant

ICONIX, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

ICONIX, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

LANCE TOKUDA, JIA SHEN, and

NETPICKLE, INC.,

Defendants.

Case No. C06-02201 SBA (JCS)

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL

DISMISSAL

Case 4:06-cv-02201-SBA Document 219 Filed 01/09/2007 Page 1 of 3

XXXXXXXX

Case 4:06-cv-02201-SBA Document 220 Filed 01/11/07 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

OHS West:260155312.1 - 1 -

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING

CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL

C06-02201 SBA

WHEREAS, on November 17, 2006, Plaintiff Iconix, Inc. (“Iconix”) and Defendants 

netPickle, Inc., Lance Tokuda and Jia Shen (collectively, “Defendants”) reached a settlement 

agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) which cannot be fully performed until 100 days from 

the filing of this stipulation;

WHEREAS, the parties wish to dismiss the action upon the completion of that 100 day

period, conditioned upon the prior satisfaction of all conditions which need to be satisfied under 

the Settlement Agreement within the 100 day period;

NOW, THEREFORE,

1. Pursuant to the terms set forth below, the parties stipulate to conditionally dismiss 

all of the claims and counterclaims in this action one hundred days from the entry of this Order.

2. This dismissal is subject to the satisfaction in full of all conditions which need be 

satisfied within 100 days set forth in the parties’ Settlement Agreement as conditions precedent to 

the dismissal.

3. During this 100 day period and while this conditional dismissal is in effect, all 

matters currently before the Court in this action shall be taken off calendar, all dates set by the 

Court are vacated, and neither party shall pursue discovery or file motions in this action unrelated 

to this stipulation.

4. Once the 100 day period has passed and the conditions precedent identified in 

paragraph 2 above have been satisfied either party may so inform the Court, and this conditional 

dismissal shall become a final dismissal with prejudice of all claims and counterclaims pursuant 

to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), with each party to bear its own costs and fees.

/ / /

/ / /

Case 4:06-cv-02201-SBA Document 219 Filed 01/09/2007 Page 2 of 3
 Case 4:06-cv-02201-SBA Document 220 Filed 01/11/07 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

OHS West:260155312.1 - 2 -

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING

CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL

C06-02201 SBA

Dated: January 9, 2007 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

/s/ Kenneth A. Kuwayti /s/

Kenneth A. Kuwayti

Attorneys for Plaintiff

ICONIX, INC.

Dated: January 9, 2007 ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP

/s/ I. Neel Chatterjee /s/

I. Neel Chatterjee

Attorneys for Defendants

LANCE TOKUDA, JIA SHEN, AND 

NETPICKLE, INC.

Filer’s Attestation: Pursuant to General Order No. 45, §X(B), I attest under penalty of 

perjury that concurrence in the filing of the document has been obtained from its signatory. 

Dated: January 9, 2007 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ I. Neel Chatterjee /s/

I. Neel Chatterjee

ORDER

PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January ___, 2007

___________________________________

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-02201-SBA Document 219 Filed 01/09/2007 Page 3 of 3

10

Case 4:06-cv-02201-SBA Document 220 Filed 01/11/07 Page 3 of 3