From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

VIA Techs. Inc. v. VIZIO, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION
Oct 25, 2011
CASE NO. CV11-0077 PJH (N.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO. CV11-0077 PJH

10-25-2011

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

DAVID N. MAKOUS 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)


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 EXTENDING DATE FOR

COMPLETION OF MEDIATION;

[PROPOSED] ORDER


Complaint Filed: January 7, 2011


Trial Date: October 29, 2012

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, at that mediation an agreement in principal was achieved on the terms of settlement of this case, several draft settlement agreements have since been circulated among the parties, and the parties believe that a final settlement will be achieved soon;

The parties hereby respectfully request that any deadline to complete mediation be extended until November 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.

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton

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 19th day of October, 2011 at Los Angeles, California.

Joshua S. Hodas


Summaries of

VIA Techs. Inc. v. VIZIO, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION
Oct 25, 2011
CASE NO. CV11-0077 PJH (N.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 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: Oct 25, 2011

Citations

CASE NO. CV11-0077 PJH (N.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2011)