From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

VIA Techs. Inc. v. Vizio, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION
Nov 16, 2011
CASE NO. CV11-0077 PJH (N.D. Cal. Nov. 16, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO. CV11-0077 PJH

11-16-2011

VIA TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a California corporation, and VIA TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Taiwan corporation, Plaintiffs, v. VIZIO, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendant.

DAVID N. MAKOUS, SB# 082409 JOSHUA S. HODAS, SB# 250802 LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP Attorneys for Vizio, Inc., a California Corporation


DAVID N. MAKOUS, SB# 082409

JOSHUA S. HODAS, SB# 250802

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

Attorneys for Vizio, Inc., a California Corporation

Honorable Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton


JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST FOR AN ORDER FURTHER EXTENDING

DATE FOR COMPLETION OF MEDIATION; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Whereas, the Court referred this case for court mediation on July 5, 2011 and subsequently, on joint stipulated motion of the parties, referred it to private mediation on July 11, 2011; and

Whereas, Local Rule ADR 37 requires that mediation be held within 90 days of referral to a mediator; and

Whereas the parties held a private mediation before Hon. Daniel Weinstein (ret.) of JAMS on September 28, 2011; and

Whereas the parties previously stipulated to, and the Court ordered, an extension of the deadline to complete mediation until November 15, 201; and

Whereas, at that mediation an agreement in principal was achieved on the terms of settlement of this case, and since then the parties have diligently pursued settlement, with several draft settlement agreements having since been circulated among the parties; and

Whereas, the parties believe that a final settlement will be achieved soon;

The parties hereby respectfully request that any deadline to complete mediation be further extended until December 15, 2011 in order to allow time for a final agreement to be completed.

Respectfully submitted,

DAVID N. MAKOUS

JOSHUA S. HODAS

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

Joshua S. Hodas

Attorneys for VIZIO, INC., a Delaware Corporation

J. DAVID HADDEN

JEDEDIAH WAKEFILED

TYLER G. NEWBY

SEBASTIAN KAPLAN

FENWICK & WEST LLP

Jedediah Wakefield

Attorneys for Plaintiffs VIA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

(Taiwan) and VIA TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (California)

[Proposed] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton

United States District Court Judge

Nonthern District of California

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 45

Pursuant to General Order No. 45 of the Northern District of California, I, Joshua S. Hodas, attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories to this document.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 15th day of November, 2011 at Los Angeles, California.

By: Joshua S. Hodas


Summaries of

VIA Techs. Inc. v. Vizio, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION
Nov 16, 2011
CASE NO. CV11-0077 PJH (N.D. Cal. Nov. 16, 2011)
Case details for

VIA Techs. Inc. v. Vizio, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:VIA TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a California corporation, and VIA TECHNOLOGIES…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION

Date published: Nov 16, 2011

Citations

CASE NO. CV11-0077 PJH (N.D. Cal. Nov. 16, 2011)