Case 3:18-cv-02621-WHO Document 64 Filed 01/23/19 Page 1 of 5
`
`
`
`PAUL ANDRE (SBN: 196585)
`pandre@kramerlevin.com
`LISA KOBIALKA (SBN: 191404)
`lkobialka@kramerlevin.com
`JAMES HANNAH (SBN: 237978)
`jhannah@kramerlevin.com
`AUSTIN MANES (SBN: 284065)
`amanes@kramerlevin.com
`KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL
`LLP
`990 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`Telephone: (650) 752-1700
`Facsimile: (650) 752-1800
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`FINJAN, INC.
`
`
`CLEMENT ROBERTS (SBN: 209203)
`croberts@orrick.com
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
`405 Howard Street
`San Francisco, CA 94105
`Telephone:
`(415) 773-5700
`Facsimile:
`(415) 773-5759
`
`VICKIE FEEMAN (SBN: 177487)
`vfeeman@orrick.com
`FRANCES CHEEVER (SBN: 287585)
`fcheever@orrick.com
`EVAN BREWER (SBN: 304411)
`ebrewer@orrick.com
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
`1000 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA 94025-1015
`Telephone:
`+1 650 614 7400
`Facsimile:
`+1 650 614 7401
`
`Attorneys for Defendants
`CHECK POINT SOFTWARE
`TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and
`CHECK POINT SOFTWARE
`TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
`
`FINJAN, INC. a Delaware Corporation,
`
`Case No. 5:18-cv-02621-WHO
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`CHECK POINT SOFTWARE
`TECHNOLOGIES INC., a Delaware
`Corporation, CHECK POINT SOFTWARE
`TECHNOLOGIES LTD., an Israeli Limited
`Company,
`
`Defendants.
`
`STIPULATION AND ORDER
`EXTENDING TIME TO SUBMIT
`REPLY IN SUPPORT OF
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO
`ENFORCE ORDER AND STRIKE
`INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS
`
`February 13, 2019
`Date:
`2:00 p.m.
`Time:
`Location: Courtroom 2, 17th Floor
`Judge:
`Hon. William H. Orrick
`
`
`
`
`
`STIPULATION AND ORDER
`EXTENDING TIME TO FILE REPLY
`5:18-CV-02621-WHO
`
`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
`
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON &
`SUTCLIFFE LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`
`SILICON VALLEY
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-02621-WHO Document 64 Filed 01/23/19 Page 2 of 5
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1(b), 6-2, and 7-12, Plaintiff Finjan, Inc. (“Finjan”) and
`
`Defendants Check Point Software Technologies, Inc. and Check Point Software Technologies,
`
`Ltd. (“Check Point”) (collectively, “the Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby
`
`stipulate to the following request to extend by seven days the deadline for Check Point to file a
`
`reply in support of Check Point’s Motion to Enforce Order and Strike Infringement Contentions
`
`(“Motion to Strike”), ECF No. 55.
`
`WHEREAS, on January 3, 2019, Check Point filed a Motion to Strike, ECF No. 55;
`
`WHEREAS, on January 17, 2019, Finjan filed an opposition to Check Point’s Motion to
`
`Strike, ECF No. 61;
`
`10
`
`WHEREAS, under Civil Local Rule 7-3(b), the deadline for Check Point to file a reply in
`
`11
`
`support of its Motion to Strike is January 24, 2019;
`
`12
`
`WHEREAS, the associate who was the primary drafter of Check Point’s Motion to Strike
`
`13
`
`suffered an injury over the weekend, and as a result Check Point requested a seven-day extension
`
`14
`
`of the due date for its reply brief in support of that motion;
`
`15
`
`WHEREAS, in the spirit of good faith and professional conduct, Finjan agreed to Check
`
`16
`
`Point’s requested extension, and thus the Parties stipulate to continue the deadline for Check
`
`17
`
`Point to file its reply in support of its Motion to Strike by seven days, until January 31, 2019;
`
`18
`
`WHEREAS, the Court previously modified the schedule in this case three times: to adjust
`
`19
`
`the briefing schedule for Finjan’s Motion to Impute Service, Dkt. No. 35, to extend the hearing
`
`20
`
`date on Finjan’s Motion to Impute Service by seven days, Dkt. No. 42, and to adjust the briefing
`
`21
`
`schedule and hearing on Finjan’s Motion to Strike and extend Check Point Software
`
`22
`
`Technologies, Ltd.’s time to respond to the complaint, Dkt. No. 52.
`
`23
`
`WHEREAS, the requested continuance should not have any material effect on the
`
`24
`
`schedule in this case.
`
`25
`
`NOW THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate and request that the deadline for Check
`
`26
`
`Point to file a reply in support of its Motion to Strike be extended from January 24, 2019 to
`
`27
`
`January 31, 2019.
`
`28
`
`
`
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON &
`SUTCLIFFE LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`
`SILICON VALLEY
`
`
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO
`FILE REPLY
`5:18-CV-02621-WHO
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-02621-WHO Document 64 Filed 01/23/19 Page 3 of 5
`
`
`
`IT IS SO STIPULATED.
`
`
`Dated: January 22, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: January 22, 2019
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
`
`By:
`
`
`
` /s/ Evan Brewer
`Evan Brewer
`Attorneys for Defendant
`CHECK POINT SOFTWARE
`TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP
`
`By:
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Austin Manes
`Austin Manes
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`FINJAN, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO
`FILE REPLY
`5:18-CV-02621-WHO
`
`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
`
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON &
`SUTCLIFFE LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`
`SILICON VALLEY
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-02621-WHO Document 64 Filed 01/23/19 Page 4 of 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO L.R. 5-1(I)
`
`In accordance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I attest that concurrence in the filing of this
`
`document has been obtained from any other signatory to this document.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Evan Brewer _
` Evan Brewer
`
`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
`
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON &
`SUTCLIFFE LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`
`SILICON VALLEY
`
`
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO
`FILE REPLY
`5:18-CV-02621-WHO
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-02621-WHO Document 64 Filed 01/23/19 Page 5 of 5
`
`ORDER
`
`
`
`
`
`PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`The deadline for Check Point to file a reply in support of its Motion to Strike, ECF No.
`
`55, is extended from January 24, 2019 to January 31, 2019.
`
`
`Dated: January 23, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The Honorable William H. Orrick
`United States District Judge
`
`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
`
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON &
`SUTCLIFFE LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`
`SILICON VALLEY
`
`
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO
`FILE REPLY
`5:18-CV-02621-WHO
`
`