Acer, Inc. et al v. Technology Properties Limited et al
Filing
338
ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO PROVIDE NOTICE RE. REASSIGNMENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE GREWAL. Joint Statement due by 8/6/2012. Signed by Chief Judge James Ware on August 2, 2012. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/2/2012)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
8
Acer, Inc.,
9
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
Plaintiff,
Technology Properties Ltd, et al.,
Defendants.
16
Plaintiff,
v.
Technology Properties Ltd, et al.,
17
Defendants.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
/
HTC Corp.,
14
15
ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO
PROVIDE NOTICE RE. REASSIGNMENT
TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE GREWAL
v.
12
13
NO. C 08-00877 JW
NO. C 08-00882 JW
NO. C 08-05398 JW
/
Barco NV,
Plaintiff,
v.
Technology Properties Ltd, et al.,
Defendants.
/
On June 12, 2012, the Court issued its First Claim Construction Order in the above-captioned
25
matters. (See Docket Item No. 336 in No. C 08-00877 JW.) In that Order, the Court informed the
26
parties that, in light of its impending retirement, it proposed to assign this case to Magistrate Judge
27
Grewal. (Id. at 22.) The Court instructed the parties to state “whether they jointly consent to having
28
this case immediately reassigned to Judge Grewal,” and informed them that, in the event they do not
1
jointly consent to the immediate reassignment, “the case will remain with Judge Ware and be subject
2
to reassignment in due course.” (Id.)
3
On July 2, 2012, the parties filed a Joint Statement in response to the Court’s First Claim
4
Construction Order. (See Docket Item No. 337 in No. C 08-00877 JW.) In that Joint Statement, the
5
parties stated that “[a]t this time, not all parties have agreed to consent to Magistrate Judge Grewal
6
for further proceedings.” (Id. at 3.) In particular, the Joint Statement informed the Court that
7
“Barco and HTC have not yet made a final determination but expect to have a decision soon.” (Id.)
8
However, the parties have not filed any subsequent statement informing the Court whether Barco
9
and HTC have agreed to consent to having this case reassigned to Judge Grewal.
Accordingly, and in order to resolve this issue prior to the Court’s retirement, the parties
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
shall file a Joint Statement on or before August 6, 2012 indicating whether all parties consent to
12
having this case immediately reassigned to Judge Grewal. If all parties have not consented to the
13
reassignment to Judge Grewal by that date, the case will remain with Judge Ware and will be subject
14
to reassignment in due course.
15
16
17
Dated: August 2, 2012
JAMES WARE
United States District Chief Judge
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:
2
Deepak Gupta dgupta@fbm.com
Eugene Y. Mar emar@fbm.com
Harold H. Davis harold.davis@klgates.com
James Carl Otteson jim@agilityiplaw.com
Jas S Dhillon jas.dhillon@klgates.com
Jeffrey M. Fisher jfisher@fbm.com
Jeffrey Michael Ratinoff jeffrey.ratinoff@klgates.com
John L. Cooper jcooper@fbm.com
Kyle Dakai Chen kyle.chen@cooley.com
Mark R. Weinstein mweinstein@cooley.com
Michelle Gail Breit mbreit@agilityiplaw.com
Nan E. Joesten njoesten@fbm.com
Paul A. Alsdorf palsdorf@fbm.com
Samuel Citron O’Rourke eupton@whitecase.com
Stephanie Powers Skaff sskaff@fbm.com
Timothy Paar Walker timothy.walker@klgates.com
William Sloan Coats william.coats@kayescholer.com
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
Dated: August 2, 2012
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
By:
/s/ JW Chambers
William Noble
Courtroom Deputy
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
