JOINT STATUS REPORT 1

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

Mark R. Figueiredo, Esq. (Cal. SBN 178850)

Ethan G. Solove, Esq. (Cal. SBN 308026)

Austin T. Jackson, Esq. (Cal. SBN 317538)

STRUCTURE LAW GROUP, LLP

1754 Technology Drive, Suite 135

San Jose, California 95110

Telephone: (408) 441-7500

Facsimile: (408) 441-7501 

Attorneys for Defendants 

INDYZEN, INC. and PRAVEEN NARRA KUMAR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On Behalf of PARKRIDGE LIMITED, a Hong

Kong corporation, by Mabel Mak, and MABEL 

MAK, an individual,

Plaintiffs,

v.

INDYZEN, INC., a California corporation, and 

PRAVEEN NARRA KUMAR, an individual,

 Defendants.

Case No. 4:16-cv-07387-JSW

JOINT STATUS REPORT 

Date: October 7, 2019

Time: N/A

Dept.: N/A

Judge: Hon. Jeffrey S. White

The Parties respectfully submit the following Joint Status Report pursuant to Docket 24 in the 

above captioned case. The above-captioned case is stayed pursuant to the April 18, 2017 Order. Dkt. 

24, at 9-10. 

Plaintiff’s Statement Only

Defendants’ mischaracterize below the Final Award as they substantively lost on all of their 

cross-claims, and their recitation below is nevertheless premature as the award is currently under 

review by the Arbitrator. Indeed, Cross-Respondents (i.e. Parkridge et al.) substantially prevailed on

all of the cross-claims, including the trade secret misappropriation, breach of contract for 

confidentiality breaches, and the copyright infringement claims assert by Defendants/CrossClaimants, among other things. The limited extent that declaratory relief was granted for Defendant 

Case 4:16-cv-07387-JSW Document 77 Filed 10/07/19 Page 1 of 3
JOINT STATUS REPORT 2

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

Indyzen/Cross-Claimant was simply administerial as it merely clarified that they owned the 

software code that Indyzen developed, which was not claimed to be owned by Cross-Respondents. 

Further, the attorney fee award noted below is also being reviewed by the Arbitrator, and 

improperly included numerous fees including for claims for Defendant Indyzen’s (as CrossClaimant) attorney’s fees, despite its substantive cross-claims being denied, among other reasons. 

Defendants’ Statement Only

The evidentiary hearing for the arbitration concluded in May 2019. The Arbitrator issued a 

Final Award on August 19, 2019, the main points of which follow: (1) The Arbitrator denied in full 

Plaintiffs/Claimants’ claims against Defendants/Cross-Respondents. (2) The Arbitrator granted 

Defendant/Cross-Claimant Indyzen, Inc.’s cross-claim for declaratory relief against Indyzen, Inc., 

and denied the rest. (3) The Arbitrator awarded Defendants/Cross-Respondents attorneys’ fees 

from both Plaintiffs/Cross-Respondents in the amount of $678,825. 

Since the issuance of the Final Award, both sides have submitted follow-up requests to the 

Arbitrator, and are awaiting rulings on those requests. 

DATED: October 7, 2019 Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Adam Wolek

Adam Wolek (pro hac vice)

Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP

111 E. Wacker Drive, Suite 2800

Chicago, Illinois 60601-3713

Tel: 312.836.4063 

Fax: 312.966.8598

awolek@taftlaw.com

LAW OFFICES OF DAVID A. MAKMAN 

David A. Makman, SBN 178195

david@makmanlaw.com

Attorneys for PLAINTIFFS

DATED: October 7, 2019 Respectfully submitted,

Case 4:16-cv-07387-JSW Document 77 Filed 10/07/19 Page 2 of 3
JOINT STATUS REPORT 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

STRUCTURE LAW GROUP, LLP

By:/s/ Ethan G. Solove

Ethan G. Solove

esolove@structurelaw.com

Attorneys for DEFENDANTS

Case 4:16-cv-07387-JSW Document 77 Filed 10/07/19 Page 3 of 3