Matchpoint Solutions v. Information Management Consulting, Inc. et al, No. 3:2012cv02472 - Document 30 (N.D. Cal. 2013)
Court Description: STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 1/3/13. (tdm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/4/2013)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Matchpoint Solutions v. Information Management Consulting, Inc. et al 1 2 3 4 5 6 HARMEET K. DHILLON (SBN: 207873) harmeet@dhillonsmith.com NITOJ P. SINGH (SBN: 265005) nsingh@dhillonsmith.com DHILLON & SMITH LLP 177 Post Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, California 94108 Telephone: (415) 433-1700 Facsimile: (415) 520-6593 Attorneys for Plaintiff MatchPoint Solutions 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 Doc. 30 MATCHPOINT SOLUTIONS, a California corporation, 12 Plaintiff, 13 Case Number: 12-CV-02472-SC STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION v. 14 15 16 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT CONSULTING, INC., a Texas corporation, and FRANCIS T. KHUONG, an individual, Defendants. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Plaintiff MatchPoint Solutions and defendants Information Management Consulting, Inc., and Francis T. Khuong (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby enter into this Stipulation to entry of injunctive relief as follows: WHEREAS, on May 15, 2012, Plaintiff, MatchPoint Solutions (“MatchPoint”) filed a Complaint against Francis T. Khuong (“Khuong”), and Information Management Consulting, Inc. (“IMC”) (collectively, “Defendants”) for inter alia breach of contract, intentional interference with contracts and economic advantage, and prima facie tort; WHEREAS, Defendants have been represented by the attorneys whose names appear hereafter; and Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for Permanent Injunction -1- Case No. 12-CV-02472-SC Dockets.Justia.com 1 WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to entry of this Stipulated Final Judgment and 2 Order for Permanent Injunction (“Order”) to resolve all matters in dispute in this Action without 3 trial or adjudication of any issue of law or fact herein; 4 5 THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: 6 FINDINGS 7 1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case and over the 9 2. Venue in this District is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2). 10 3. The Complaint states claims upon which relief may be granted against 8 11 Parties. Defendants. 12 13 4. the jurisdictional facts. 14 15 5. Defendants waive all rights to seek appellate review or otherwise challenge or contest the validity of this Order. 16 17 Defendants make no admissions to eh allegations in the Complaint, other than 6. This Action and the relief awarded herein are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any settlement the parties may have reached in this Action. 18 19 20 21 [PROPOSED] ORDER I. UNILATERAL STAY-AWAY ORDER BETWEEN MATCHPOINT AND KHUONG PARTIES A. MatchPoint. MatchPoint is a California corporation with its principal place of 22 business at 6690 Amador Plaza Rd., Suite 225, Dublin, Alameda County, 23 California. Other MatchPoint business locations include: 24 25 26 i. California: 4516 Montcurve Blvd., Fair Oaks, CA 95627; ii. New Jersey: 40 Brunswick Ave., Suite 200, Edison, NJ 08817; iii. Utah: 414369 Arcadia Rose Ln., Suite 100, Herriman, UT 94096; Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for Permanent Injunction -2- Case No. 12-CV-02472-SC 1 iv. India: #8-2-293/82/A/796?B, Rd. No.: 36, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 500 2 033. 3 B. Infinera. Infinera Corporation (“Infinera”) is a Delaware corporation and a client 4 of MatchPoint. Infinera is a company headquartered at 140 Caspian Ct. 5 Sunnyvale, California 94089. Other Infinera business locations include: 6 i. Maryland: 9005 Junction Drive, Suite B, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701; 7 ii. Pennsylvania: 7360 Windsor Drive, Allentown, PA 18106; 8 iii. Canada: 555 Legget Drive, Suite 222, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K2K 9 10 2X3; iv. United Kingdom: 1 Ropemaker Street, London EC2Y 9HT, United 11 Kingdom; 12 v. Singapore: 8th floor, Samsung Hub, 3 Church Street, Singapore 049483; 13 vi. China: Suite 0706, 7/F, Shouxiang Science Building, No. 51 Xueyuan 14 15 16 Rd., Haidian District, Beijing 100191; vii. Hong Kong: 14/F, Suite 02, Cityplaza 3, Taikoo Shing; viii. Japan: Seika Building 9th Floor, 2-12-14 Kanda-Ogawa-machi, Chiyoda- 17 18 ku, Tokyo, 101-0052 Japan; ix. India: Prestige Solitaire , 401, Level 3, 6, Brunton Road, Bangalore 560 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 025. C. Places of Business Defined. For the purposes of this Order, MatchPoint and Infinera have places of business, as designated above in Sections A and B. MatchPoint and Infinera may change the location of their places of business from time to time by the giving of written notice of the location and the effective date of the change by that party’s counsel to the Khuong Parties’ counsel. MatchPoint and Infinera’s places of business are protected areas pursuant to section I(G), below. Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for Permanent Injunction -3- Case No. 12-CV-02472-SC 1 D. Protected Parties. MatchPoint and Infinera are the sole protected parties to this 2 Order who are entitled to enforce its terms. Other persons who may receive 3 protection under this Order by virtue of their association with a protected party 4 are the directors, employees, officers, agents, and clients of the protected parties. 5 Any other persons is not a third party beneficiary and is not entitled to enforce 6 the terms of this Order. 7 E. Term. The relief provided by this permanent injunction shall last indefinitely. 8 F. Prohibited communications. 9 i. In General. Khuong Parties may not communicate or attempt to 10 communicate directly or indirectly with MatchPoint or Infinera, or their 11 respective 12 independent contractors. For the purposes of this Order, the term, 13 “communicate” includes all forms of messaging or content, including 14 without limitation direct personal contact by talking or gesture, voice or 15 communications by telephone, including mobile or cell phones, and 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 directors, agents, employees, managers, clients, and internet telephony, written communications by mail, personal delivery, email, text message, or facsimile transmission, video or photographic communications. ii. Persons Included. For purposes of this Order, the persons barred from communications with MatchPoint or Infinera, or their respective directors, agents, employees, managers, clients, and independent contractors are the Khuong Parties and their spouses, domestic partners, agents, managers, employees, independent, and advisors; provided however, that the attorneys for the parties may communicate with one another about matters concerning the parties. iii. Persons Excluded. The attorneys for the parties may communicate with Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for Permanent Injunction -4- Case No. 12-CV-02472-SC 1 one another about matters concerning the parties, and any communication 2 between parties shall be conducted exclusively through their respective 3 legal counsel. 4 iv. Communications Excluded. The general prohibition against intra-party 5 communication does not prohibit communications conducted through the 6 parties’ counsel and which concern this Order, the parties’ settlement 7 agreement, or its performance, are made in the course of litigation, are 8 required by law, are privileged under the law, or are reasonably required 9 by the terms of the confidential settlement agreement between the parties. 10 The general prohibition against intra-party communication does not 11 prohibit communications inadvertently made by MatchPoint or Infinera 12 to Khuong Parties resulting from advertisements related to any consulting 13 services the Khuong Parties may provide. Should MatchPoint or Infinera 14 contact the Khuong Parties while in the process of searching for such 15 consulting services, the Khuong Parties shall politely decline any such 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 solicitation or not respond to the solicitation. G. Stay Away Orders. i. In Areas Other Than “Protected Areas” (defined below). Outdoors. While outside protected areas (defined below) and in private or private exterior spaces (other than indoor spaces described in subsection 2.7), the Khuong Parties agree not to approach intentionally or stand within fifty (50) yards of the protected parties identified in Section 2.4 (the “Protected Parties”) or members of any group accompanying that Protected Parties while in public. For the purposes of this paragraph, the term, “members of any group,” shall be defined to include spouses, friends or companions, agents, employees, managers, and independent contractors of the Protected Parties who are located within a Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for Permanent Injunction -5- Case No. 12-CV-02472-SC 1 two (2) yard radius of the Protected Parties. 2 Indoors. While inside any building or the exterior grounds of any 3 building, other than the parties’ place of business defined in Section 2.4, the 4 Khuong Parties agree not to approach intentionally or stand within three (3) 5 yards of the Protected Parties or members of any group accompanying the 6 Protected Parties. For the purposes of this paragraph, the term, “members of any 7 group,” shall be defined to include spouses, friends or companions, agents, 8 employees, managers, or independent contractors of the Protected Parties who 9 are located within a two (2) yard radius of the Protected Parties. 10 ii. Within Protected Areas. 11 Establishment of “Protected Area.” Within a radius of fifty (50) yards of 12 Protected Parties’ Places of Business, there shall be deemed to be a “protected 13 area,” for the benefit of the Protected Parties having their business within that 14 area. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Operations Within the Protected Area. The Khuong Parties, or their spouses, agents, employees, managers, representatives, or independent contractors, shall enter the Protected Parties Places of Business or loiter within a protected area. For the purposes of this Order, the term, “loiter,” shall be defined to occur where Khuong Parties, or their spouses, agents, employees, managers, representatives, or independent contractors, remain within a Protected Parties’ protected area, undertrained or uninterrupted, without reasonable justification for doing so, for a period of more than three (3) minutes. While within a protected area, the Khuong Parties agree not to approach intentionally or stand within eight (8) yards of the Protected Parties or members of any group accompanying the Protected Parties. For the purposes of this subsection, the term, “members of any group,” shall be defined to include those Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for Permanent Injunction -6- Case No. 12-CV-02472-SC 1 spouses, friends or companions, agents, employees, managers, and independent 2 contractors of the Protected Parties who are located within a two (2) yard radius 3 of the Protected Parties. The Khuong Parties, or their spouses, agents, 4 employees, managers, and independent contractors may walk, drive, or otherwise 5 pass through the protected area of the other party. 6 H. Other Prohibited Personal Conduct. The Khuong Parties, or their spouses, 7 agents, employees, managers, representatives, or independent contractors, may 8 not (a) harass, attack, strike, threaten, assault, hit, follow, stalk, destroy personal 9 property, or block the movements of the Protected Parties at any time, (b) 10 conduct themselves, position themselves, or create any situation or circumstance 11 which entraps the other party into violating this Order, or (c) engage in otherwise 12 permitted conduct with the intent of annoying the Protected Parties or baiting 13 them with the intent of inducing a violation of this Order. II. 15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Court retains jurisdiction of this matter for purposes of construction, modification, and enforcement of this Order. 17 18 The parties hereby stipulate to the entry of the foregoing Order, which shall constitute a final Order in this Action. 19 IT IS SO ORDERED: 21 22 S Date: 1/3/13 RT U O 20 S DISTRICT TE C TA ERED O ORD IT IS S R NIA 16 RETENTION OF JURISDICTION UNIT ED 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 26 /// Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for Permanent Injunction -7- FO /// LI 25 ER A /// H 24 onti amuel C Judge S RT /// NO 23 N F D IS T IC T O R C Case No. 12-CV-02472-SC 1 2 IT IS SO STIPULATED: Dated: December 18, 2012 3 DHILLON & SMITH LLP By 4 5 /s/ Nitoj P. Singh Harmeet K. Dhillon Nitoj P. Singh Attorneys for Plaintiff 6 7 Dated: December 18, 2012 THE LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS C. BARRON 8 9 10 By /s/ Thomas C. Barron Thomas C. Barron Attorney for Defendants 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for Permanent Injunction -8- Case No. 12-CV-02472-SC
]]>
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.
