Genentech, Inc. et al v. Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GMBH et al, No. 3:2008cv04909 - Document 624 (N.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER granting extention re: fees and costs (tf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/2/2011)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Genentech, Inc. et al v. Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GMBH et al Doc. 624 1 Counsel Listed on Following Page 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 13 SANOFI-AVENTIS DEUTSCHLAND GMBH, 14 Plaintiff, 15 vs. 16 GENENTECH, INC. and BIOGEN IDEC 17 INC., 18 19 Defendants. CASE NOS. 08-cv-4909-SI (BZ), 09-cv-4919-SI STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ENLARGING TIME ON PROCEEDINGS ON COSTS, ATTORNEYS’ FEES, AND SANCTIONS [Civil L.R. 6-1, 6-2] Honorable Susan Illston United States District Judge 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 01731.51443/4118152.1 Case Nos. 08-cv-4909-SI (BZ); 09-cv-4919-SI STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ENLARGING TIME ON PROCEEDINGS ON COSTS, ATTORNEYS’ FEES, AND SANCTIONS Dockets.Justia.com 1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & 2 SULLIVAN, LLP Charles K. Verhoeven (Bar No. 170151) 3 charlesverhoeven@quinnemanuel.com 50 California Street, 22nd Floor 4 San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 875-6600 5 Facsimile: (415) 875-6700 6 Victoria F. Maroulis (Bar No. 202603) victoriamaroulis@quinnemanuel.com 7 Gabriel S. Gross (Bar No. 254672) gabegross@quinnemanuel.com 8 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor Redwood Shores, California 94065-2139 9 Telephone: (650) 801-5000 Facsimile: (650) 801-5100 10 Attorneys for Defendant Genentech, Inc. 11 KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON 12 LLP James G. Gilliland (Bar No. 107988) 13 jgilliland@kilpatricktownsend.com Two Embarcadero Center, Eighth Floor 14 San Francisco, CA 94111 15 Telephone: (415) 576-0200 Facsimile: (415) 576-0300 16 Anne M. Rogaski (Bar No. 184754) 17 arogaski@kilpatricktownsend.com 379 Lytton Avenue 18 Palo Alto, CA 94301 19 Telephone: (650) 326-2400 Facsimile: (650) 326-2422 20 21 FOLEY HOAG LLP Donald R. Ware (pro hac vice) dware@foleyhoag.com Claire Laporte (pro hac vice) claporte@foleyhoag.com Jeremy A. Younkin (pro hac vice) jyounkin@foleyhoag.com Seaport World Trade Center West 155 Seaport Boulevard Boston, MA 02210-2600 Telephone: (617) 832-1180 Facsimile: (617) 832-7000 Attorneys for Defendant Biogen Idec Inc. HARVEY SISKIND LLP D. Peter Harvey (Bar No. 55712) pharvey@harveysiskind.com Naomi Jane Gray (Bar No. 230171) ngray@harveysiskind.com Four Embarcadero Center, 39th Floor San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 354-0100 Facsimile: (415) 391-7124 FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO William E. Solander (admitted pro hac vice) wsolander@fchs.com Dominick A. Conde (admitted pro hac vice) dconde@fchs.com Peter D. Shapiro (admitted pro hac vice) pshapiro@fchs.com Joshua A. Davis (admitted pro hac vice) jdavis@fchs.com 1290 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10104 Telephone: 212-218-2100 Facsimile: 212-218-2200 22 23 Attorneys for Plaintiff Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH 24 25 26 27 28 01731.51443/4118152.1 Case Nos. 08-cv-4909-SI (BZ); 09-cv-4919-SI 2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ENLARGING TIME ON PROCEEDINGS ON COSTS, ATTORNEYS’ FEES, AND SANCTIONS 1 Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1 and 6-2, Plaintiff Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH 2 ("Sanofi") and Defendants Genentech, Inc. ("Genentech") and Biogen Idec Inc. ("Biogen") 3 respectfully request that the Court enter the following stipulation regarding proceedings on costs, 4 attorneys’ fees, and sanctions. The parties now AGREE AND STIPULATE to enlarge time on these 5 proceedings until after disposition of both Sanofi’s appeal of this Court’s final judgment of non6 infringement and Defendants’ counterclaims of invalidity and unenforceability. 7 1. Reason for the Request 8 On April 21, 2011, the Court granted Sanofi’s motion for entry of final judgment of non- 9 infringement as to Rituxan® and Avastin® under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). (D.N. 10 621.) The Court stayed further proceedings, including Defendants’ counterclaims of invalidity and 11 unenforceability, pending the outcome of any appeal of the Court’s final judgment of non12 infringement. (Id.) Under Civil Local Rule 54-1, Defendants must file a bill of costs within 14 days 13 of the Court’s entry of final judgment, or by May 5, 2011. Under Civil Local Rule 54-5, motions for 14 awards of attorneys’ fees are also due within 14 days of entry of judgment. Under Civil Local Rule 15 7-8(d), motions for sanctions also must be filed within 14 days of entry of judgment. The parties 16 now seek to stay these proceedings on costs and fees, as well as any proceedings on sanctions under 17 Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 and Civil Local Rule 7-8(d) and on whether this is an “exceptional case” under 35 18 U.S.C. § 285, until after disposition of Sanofi’s appeal of this Court’s final judgment of non19 infringement and Defendants’ counterclaims of invalidity and unenforceability. An order staying 20 these proceedings will conserve judicial resources in the event that any aspect of the Court’s Rule 21 54(b) judgment is reversed and remanded on appeal and because further proceedings on Defendants’ 22 pending counterclaims are required. 23 2. Prior Time Modifications 24 The time for Sanofi to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint was previously 25 extended. The briefing and hearing schedule for Motions to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction 26 brought by Sanofi and its former co-defendants was temporarily vacated. The briefing and hearing 27 schedule for Genentech's Motion To Disqualify McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert and Berghoff LLP was 28 extended by four weeks. The briefing and hearing schedule for Sanofi’s Motion for Leave to 01731.51443/4118152.1 Case Nos. 08-cv-4909-SI (BZ); 09-cv-4919-SI 3 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ENLARGING TIME ON PROCEEDINGS ON COSTS, ATTORNEYS’ FEES, AND SANCTIONS 1 Amend Its Pleadings and Infringement Contentions was previously extended by five weeks and then 2 extended again by seven weeks. The Markman hearing and tutorial were previously continued by 3 45 days. The date for Sanofi’s oppositions to Defendants’ motions for summary judgment was 4 extended by approximately three weeks. The date for Defendants’ replies to Sanofi’s summary 5 judgment oppositions was extended by one week. The deadline to conduct ADR was originally 6 extended by about 40 days. The deadline for conducting ADR was again extended by two months. 7 The schedule for the Further Case Management Conference was previously vacated and rescheduled 8 for five weeks later and then extended again by two weeks. The hearing schedule for the Motion for 9 Summary Judgment, Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity for Lack of Written Description, 10 Motion to Compel, Motion to Amend/Correct Infringement Contentions, and Motion to Strike was 11 extended by two weeks. The deadline for filing dispositive motions was extended three weeks and 12 the deadline for the last day on which dispositive motions could be heard was extended four weeks. 13 The Court expedited the schedule for considering Sanofi’s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment by 14 two weeks. 15 3. Effect of Requested Modification 16 The requested modification will have no effect on the rest of the schedule in this action. 17 So Stipulated. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 01731.51443/4118152.1 Case Nos. 08-cv-4909-SI (BZ); 09-cv-4919-SI 4 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ENLARGING TIME ON PROCEEDINGS ON COSTS, ATTORNEYS’ FEES, AND SANCTIONS 1 DATED: April 29, 2011 2 HARVEY SISKIND LLP FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO 3 By s/ William E. Solander William E. Solander Attorneys for Plaintiff Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH 4 5 6 7 8 DATED: April 29, 2011 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 9 10 By s/ Victoria F. Maroulis Victoria F. Maroulis Attorneys for Defendant Genentech, Inc. 11 12 13 DATED: April 29, 2011 14 TOWNSEND TOWNSEND AND CREW LLP FOLEY HOAG LLP 15 By s/ Claire Laporte Claire Laporte Attorneys for Defendant Biogen Idec Inc. 16 17 18 19 20 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 22 23 24 2 DATED: May__, 2010 ___________________________________________ Susan Illston United States District Court Judge 25 26 27 28 01731.51443/4118152.1 Case Nos. 08-cv-4909-SI (BZ); 09-cv-4919-SI 5 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ENLARGING TIME ON PROCEEDINGS ON COSTS, ATTORNEYS’ FEES, AND SANCTIONS 1 2 I, Victoria F. Maroulis, am the ECF User whose identification and password are being used 3 to file this document. Pursuant to General Order 45.X.B, I hereby attest that counsel for Plaintiff 4 has concurred in this filing. 5 6 7 DATED: April 29, 2011 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 8 9 10 By s/ Victoria F. Maroulis Victoria F. Maroulis Attorneys for Defendant Genentech, Inc. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 01731.51443/4118152.1 Case Nos. 08-cv-4909-SI (BZ); 09-cv-4919-SI 6 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ENLARGING TIME ON PROCEEDINGS ON COSTS, ATTORNEYS’ FEES, AND SANCTIONS
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
