throbber
Case 3:21-cv-09773-JD Document 25-2 Filed 02/11/22 Page 1 of 4
`Case 3:21-cv-09773-JD Document 25-2 Filed 02/11/22 Page 1 of 4
`
`EXHIBIT 1
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`

`

`Case 3:21-cv-09773-JD Document 25-2 Filed 02/11/22 Page 2 of 4
`Case 2:16-cv-00271-RCJ-VCF Document 89 Filed 10/01/18 Page 1 of 3
`
`Kelly H. Dove, Esq. (Nevada Bar No. 10569)
`SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
`3883 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1100
`Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
`Telephone: 702.784.5200
`Facsimile: 702.784.5252
`kdove@swlaw.com
`
`Frank C. Cimino, Jr. (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
`Megan S. Woodworth (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
`VENABLE LLP
`600 Massachusetts Ave., NW
`Washington, D.C. 20001
`Telephone: 202.344.4569
`Facsimile: 202.344.8300
`mswoodworth@venable.com
`fccimino@venable.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendant Cellco Partnership
`d/b/a Verizon Wireless
`
`Kevin N. Malek (pro hac vice)
`MALEK MOSS PLLC
`340 Madison Avenue, FL 19
`New York, New York 10173
`(212) 812-1491
`kevin.malek@malekmoss.com
`
`Kurt R. Bonds
`Nevada Bar No. 6228
`Adam R. Knecht
`Nevada Bar No. 13166
`ALVERSON, TAYLOR,
`MORTENSEN & SANDERS
`7401 W. Charleston Boulevard
`Las Vegas, NV 89117
`(702) 384-7000
`efile@alversontaylor.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`DISTRICT OF NEVADA
`
`VOIP-PAL.COM, INC.,
`
`Case No. 2:16-cv-00271-RCJ-VCF
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`STIPULATION AND ORDER
`TRANSFERRING THE CASE TO THE
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
`CALIFORNIA
`
`CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a Verizon
`Wireless,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Plaintiff VoIP-Pal.com (“Plaintiff” or “VoIP-Pal”) and Defendant Cellco Partnership d/b/a
`
`Verizon Wireless (“Verizon”) agree and stipulate as follows:
`
`WHEREAS Verizon filed on August 17, 2018, a Motion to Transfer Venue to the Northern
`
`District of California Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) [Dkt. No. 72]. The Motion to Transfer is
`
`fully briefed as of September 11, 2018. VoIP-Pal no longer opposes Verizon’s Motion to Transfer;
`
`WHEREAS VoIP-Pal filed a lawsuit against Twitter, Inc. in this District asserting the same
`
`patents as are asserted in this litigation. Voip-Pal.com, Inc. v. Twitter, Inc., No. 2:16-cv-02338-
`
`RFB-CWH (D. Nev.). The Voip-Pal v. Twitter case was transferred to the Northern District of
`
`California on July 23, 2018;
`
`WHEREAS VoIP-Pal has also filed lawsuits against AT&T Corp., Apple Inc., and
`
`STIPULATION AND ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE
`
`CASE NO. 2:16-CV-00271-RCJ-VCF
`
`415-653-3750
`
`SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111
`
`101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 3800
`
`VENABLE LLP
`
`

`

`Case 3:21-cv-09773-JD Document 25-2 Filed 02/11/22 Page 3 of 4
`Case 2:16-cv-00271-RCJ-VCF Document 89 Filed 10/01/18 Page 2 of 3
`
`Amazon.com, Inc. in this District. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. v. AT&T, Inc., No. 2:18-cv-01129-RCJ (D.
`
`Nev.); VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF (D. Nev.); Voip-
`
`Pal.com, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. et al., No. 2:18-cv-01076-MMD-VCF (D. Nev.). The cases
`
`involve similar allegations as this case. VoIP-Pal consents to transfer of the AT&T Corp., Apple
`
`Inc., and Amazon.com, Inc. cases to the Northern District of California.
`
`IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that this case is transferred to the United States District
`
`Court for the Northern District of California. The Clerk of Court shall close this case in this
`
`District.
`
`This Stipulation is filed in good faith and is not intended to cause unnecessary delay. The
`
`convenience of the parties and witnesses favors transfer to the Northern District of California. And
`
`because the Twitter, Inc. case was transferred to California, and VoIP-Pal consents to transfer of
`
`the AT&T Corp., Apple Inc., and Amazon.com, Inc. cases, it would be efficient for the parties and
`
`the Court to also transfer this case. There is thus good cause to transfer the case to the Northern
`
`District of California.
`
`2
`STIPULATION AND ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE
`
`CASE NO. 2:16-CV-00271-RCJ-VCF
`
`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
`
`1 2 3
`
`415-653-3750
`
`SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111
`
`101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 3800
`
`VENABLE LLP
`
`

`

`Case 3:21-cv-09773-JD Document 25-2 Filed 02/11/22 Page 4 of 4
`Case 2:16-cv-00271-RCJ-VCF Document 89 Filed 10/01/18 Page 3 of 3
`
`Dated: September 28, 2018
`
`Dated: September 28, 2018
`
`MALEK MOSS PLLC
`
`SNELL & WILMER
`
`/s/ Megan S. Woodworth
`Kelly H. Dove
`Nevada Bar No. 10569
`3883 Howard Hughes Pkwy # 1
`Las Vegas, NV 89169
`(702) 784-5200
`kdove@swlaw.com
`
`Frank C. Cimino, Jr. (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
`Megan S. Woodworth (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
`VENABLE LLP
`600 Massachusetts Ave., NW
`Washington, D.C. 20001
`Telephone: 202.344.4569
`Facsimile: 202.344.8300
`mswoodworth@venable.com
`fccimino@venable.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendant Cellco Partnership
`d/b/a Verizon Wireless
`
`/s/ Kevin N. Malek
`Kevin N. Malek (Pro Hac Vice)
`340 Madison Avenue, FL 19
`New York, New York 10173
`(212) 812-1491
`kevin.malek@malekmoss.com
`
`ALVERSON, TAYLOR,
`MORTENSEN & SANDERS
`Kurt R. Bonds
`Nevada Bar No. 6228
`Adam R. Knecht
`Nevada Bar No. 13166
`7401 W. Charleston Boulevard
`Las Vegas, NV 89117
`(702) 384-7000
`efile@alversontaylor.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED:
`
`____________________________________
`UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`DATED: _________
`
`3
`STIPULATION AND ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE
`
`CASE NO. 2:16-CV-00271-RCJ-VCF
`
`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
`
`1 2 3
`
`415-653-3750
`
`SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111
`
`101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 3800
`
`VENABLE LLP
`
`DATED: This 1st day of October, 2018.
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket