From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

CopyTele, Inc. v. E Ink Holdings, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Mar 11, 2013
Case No. 3:13-cv-00378-EMC (N.D. Cal. Mar. 11, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 3:13-cv-00378-EMC

03-11-2013

COPYTELE, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff, v. E INK HOLDINGS, INC., a Taiwanese corporation; and E INK CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Defendants.

Beatrice B. Nguyen (CSB No. 172961) CROWELL & MORING LLP Michael N. Rader (Pro Hac Vice pending) John L. Strand (Pro Hac Vice pending) Gerald Hrycyszyn (CSB No. 227814) Eric G. Kaviar (Pro Hac Vice pending) WOLF, GREENFIELD & SACKS, PC. Attorneys for Defendants E INK HOLDINGS, INC. and E INK CORPORATION LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP Eric B. Fastiff David T. Rudolf Melissa Gardner Attorneys for Plaintiff COPYTELE, INC.


Beatrice B. Nguyen (CSB No. 172961)
CROWELL & MORING LLP
Michael N. Rader (Pro Hac Vice pending)
John L. Strand (Pro Hac Vice pending)
Gerald Hrycyszyn (CSB No. 227814)
Eric G. Kaviar (Pro Hac Vice pending)
WOLF, GREENFIELD & SACKS, PC.
Attorneys for Defendants
E INK HOLDINGS, INC. and E INK CORPORATION

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS E

INK HOLDINGS, INC. AND E INK

CORPORATION'S TIME TO RESPOND

TO COMPLAINT


[Civil L. R. 6-1(a)]

WHEREAS, on January 28, 2013, Plaintiff CopyTele, Inc. ("CopyTele") filed a complaint ("Complaint") against Defendants E Ink Holdings, Inc. ("E Ink Holdings"), a Taiwanese corporation, and E Ink Corporation ("E Ink Corp."), a Delaware corporation;

WHEREAS, E Ink Corp.'s response to the Complaint was due on February 22, 2013;

WHEREAS, on February 15, 2013, CopyTele and E Ink Corp. agreed and stipulated to an interim extension until March 8, 2013, for E Ink Corp. to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint while the parties finish their negotiations on a final extension; and

WHEREAS, E Ink Holdings has agreed to waive service of summons under Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and to waive any objections to the absence of a summons or service under the laws of the United States and Taiwan;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED that:

1. E Ink Holdings shall waive service of summons under the Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and it shall waive any objections to the absence of a summons or service under the laws of the United States and Taiwan.

2. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-1(a), E Ink Holdings and E Ink Corp. shall have 91 days from the date of the filing of the complaint up to and including Monday, April 29, 2013, to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint.

CROWELL & MORING LLP

Beatrice B. Nguyen

Attorneys for Defendants

E INK HOLDINGS, INC. and

E INK CORPORATION

LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN

& BERNSTEIN, LLP

Eric B. Fastiff

David T. Rudolf

Melissa Gardner

Attorneys for Plaintiff

COPYTELE, INC.

ATTESTATION

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3) regarding signatures, I attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the other signatories.

____________________

Beatrice B. Nguyen

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. Defendants E Ink Holdings, Inc. and E Ink Corporation shall have up to and including April 29, 2013, to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint.

____________________

Hon. Edward M. Chen

United States District Judge


Summaries of

CopyTele, Inc. v. E Ink Holdings, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Mar 11, 2013
Case No. 3:13-cv-00378-EMC (N.D. Cal. Mar. 11, 2013)
Case details for

CopyTele, Inc. v. E Ink Holdings, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:COPYTELE, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff, v. E INK HOLDINGS…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Date published: Mar 11, 2013

Citations

Case No. 3:13-cv-00378-EMC (N.D. Cal. Mar. 11, 2013)