From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corporation

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 22, 2014
3:12-cv-06467-MMC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 22, 2014)

Opinion

          David T. Pritikin(Pro Hac Vice) Sidley Austin LLP Chicago, IL Aseem S. Gupta M. Patricia Thayer Philip W. Woo Sidley Austin LLP San Francisco, CA, I. Neel Chatterjee Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP Menlo Park, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff philip.warrick@klarquist.com SYNOPSYS, INC.

          George A. Riley Mark E. Miller Luann L. Simmons Michael Sapoznikow O'Melveny & Myers LLP San Francisco, CA, Xavier A. Clark (Pro Hac Vice) Kristin L. Cleveland Salumeh R. Loesch(Pro Hac Vice) Jeffrey S. Love Andrew M. Mason(Pro Hac Vice) John D. Vandenberg(Pro Hac Vice) Philip J. Warrick(Pro Hac Vice) Owen D. Yeates(Pro Hac Vice) Klarquist Sparkman, LLP Portland, OR, Attorneys for Defendant MENTOR GRAPHICS CORPORATION.


          STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

          MAXINE M. CHESNEY, District Judge

         IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff Synopsys, Inc. ("Synopsys") and Defendant Mentor Graphics Corp. ("Mentor Graphics") as follows:

         WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court's Order of August 7, 2014 at Dkt. 235, August 15, 2014 is the deadline on which to file the letter brief as to Mentor's challenges to Synopsys' privilege log, detailed in counsel for Mentor's July 18, 2014 letter to counsel for Synopsys;

         WHEREAS, the Parties still are continuing to discuss Mentor's challenges to Synopsys' privilege log, detailed in counsel for Mentor's July 18, 2014 letter to counsel for Synopsys and the dispute will be narrowed through further supplementation and/or cooperation;

         NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, the Parties hereby stipulate to extend the deadline on which to file the letter brief as to Mentor's challenges to Synopsys' privilege log, detailed in counsel for Mentor's July 18, 2014 letter to counsel for Synopsys, to August 20, 2014.

         IT IS SO STIPULATED.

         Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), the filer of this document attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the other signatory above.

         PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corporation

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 22, 2014
3:12-cv-06467-MMC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 22, 2014)
Case details for

Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corporation

Case Details

Full title:SYNOPSYS, INC., a Delaware Corporation Plaintiff, v. MENTOR GRAPHICS…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division

Date published: Aug 22, 2014

Citations

3:12-cv-06467-MMC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 22, 2014)