`
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`DOCUMENT SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Case No. 8:17-cv-00981-JVS-JCG
`[PROPOSED] ORDER
`Plaintiff,
`GRANTING JOINT
`STIPULATION TO STAY
`LITIGATION PENDING
`OUTCOME OF IPR
`PROCEEDINGS
`
`v.
`SEOUL SEMICONDUCTOR CO., LTD.,
`and SEOUL SEMICONDUCTOR, INC.,
`Defendants.
`
`DOCUMENT SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`Case No. 2:17-cv-04263-JVS-JCG
`
`v.
`CREE, INC.,
`Defendant.
`
`DOCUMENT SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`EVERLIGHT ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`and EVERLIGHT AMERICAS, INC.,
`Defendants.
`
`Case No. 2:17-cv-04273-JVS-JCG
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-06050-JVS-JEM Document 69-1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 2 of 3 Page ID #:680
`
`
`
`DOCUMENT SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`Case No. 2:17-cv-06050-JVS-JCG
`
`
`v.
`LITE-ON, INC., and LITE-ON
`TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION,
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-06050-JVS-JEM Document 69-1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 3 of 3 Page ID #:681
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Stipulation to Stay Litigation. The parties
`have agreed to stay the above-captioned actions in light of the outstanding petitions
`for inter partes review and related inter partes proceedings instituted by the USPTO.
`The Court concludes that a stay is appropriate here.
`IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT:
`The parties’ Joint Stipulation to Stay Litigation is GRANTED; and
`1.
`The above-captioned actions are STAYED.
`2.
`The parties are ORDERED to file a Joint Status Report every 60 days
`3.
`regarding the status of the above petitions for inter partes review or within 10 days
`of (1) a determination by the PTAB whether to institute any additional petitions; or
`(2) the issuance of a Final Written Decision by the PTAB for any instituted requests
`for inter partes review, whichever is earlier.
`
`
`
`Dated: _____________, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`