1























































No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING WAYMO’S REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SUR-REPLY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; 

OTTOMOTTO LLC; OTTO TRUCKING 

LLC,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING WAYMO’S 

REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SURREPLY IN OPPOSITION TO ANTHONY 

LEVANDOWSKI’S MOTION FOR 

INTERVENTION UNDER RULE 24 AND 

MODIFICATION OF ORDER 

GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN 

PART PROVISIONAL RELIEF

Hearing

Date: June 7, 2017

Time: 10:00 a.m.

Courtroom: Courtroom 8, 19th Floor

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 534 Filed 06/01/17 Page 1 of 4
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

-1- No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING WAYMO’S REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SUR-REPLY 

WHEREAS, on March 10, 2017, Plaintiff Waymo LLC (“Waymo”) filed a Motion for 

Preliminary Injunction. (Dkt. 24.) 

WHEREAS, on May 15, 2017, the Court entered a public Order (the “Order”) granting in 

part and denying in part Waymo’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (Dkt. 433.)

WHEREAS, on May 18, 2017, Non-Party Anthony Levandowski (“Levandowski”) filed a 

Motion for Intervention Under Rule 24 and Modification of the Order (the “Motion”). (Dkt. 466.)

WHEREAS, on May 22, 2017, the Court entered an Order Shortening the Briefing 

Schedule on the Motion. (Dkt. 487.) 

WHEREAS, on May 26, 2017, Waymo filed an Opposition to Levandowski’s Motion. 

(Dkt. 512.)

WHEREAS, on May 30, 2017, Levandowski filed a Reply in Support of the Motion (the 

“Reply”) that provides new evidence and argument relating to a “new development” in connection 

with Mr. Levandowski’s employment at Uber. (Dkt. 519.)

WHEREAS, Levandowski and Waymo agree that Waymo should have an opportunity to 

respond to the new evidence and argument offered in the Reply. 

THEREFORE, the parties stipulate as follows: Waymo shall be authorized to file a SurReply in opposition to the Motion not to exceed 5 pages in length before 6:00 p.m. PDT on Friday, 

June 2, 2017. 

IT IS STIPULATED.

DATED: May 31, 2017 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, 

LLP

By /s/Charles K. Verhoeven

Charles K. Verhoeven

Attorneys for WAYMO LLC

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 534 Filed 06/01/17 Page 2 of 4
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- No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING WAYMO’S REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SUR-REPLY 

DATED: May 31, 2017 RAMSEY & EHRLICH, LLP

By /s/ Amy Craig

Miles Ehrlich

Ismail Ramsey

Amy Craig

Attorneys for Non-Party Anthony Levandowski

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ________________, 2017

The Honorable William H. Alsup

June 1

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 534 Filed 06/01/17 Page 3 of 4
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

-3- No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING WAYMO’S REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SUR-REPLY 

/s/ Charles K. Verhoeven

SIGNATURE ATTESTATION

Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the 

filing of this document has been obtained from Amy Craig. 

 

 Charles K. Verhoeven

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 534 Filed 06/01/17 Page 4 of 4