From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

XOFT, INC. v. CYTYC CORPORATION

United States District Court, N.D. California, San Jose Division
Jul 24, 2007
Case No. CV 05-05312 RMW (RS) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2007)

Summary

finding indefiniteness argument "necessarily fail[ed]" because party with burden of proof had offered no evidence suggesting one skilled in the art would not understand meaning of claim

Summary of this case from Volumetrics Med. Imaging, LLC v. Toshiba America Med. Sys. Inc.

Opinion

Case No. CV 05-05312 RMW (RS).

July 24, 2007

HOWREY LLP, Henry C. Bunsow (SBN 60707), Henry C. Su (SBN 211202), HOWREY LLP, San Francisco, California, Attorneys for Defendants CYTYC CORPORATION and CYTYC SURGICAL PRODUCTS II, INC.

ORRICK, HERRINGTON SUTCLIFFE LLP, James W. Geriak (SBN 32871), Kurt T. Mulville (SBN 149218), Thomas J. Gray (SBN 191411), Mark Stirrat (SBN 229448), ORRICK, HERRINGTON SUTCLIFFE LLP, Irvine, CA, Monte Cooper (SBN 196746), ORRICK, HERRINGTON SUTCLIFFE LLP, Menlo Park, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff XOFT, INC.


STIPULATION REQUESTING AN ADDITIONAL 30-DAY STAY AND ORDER


WHEREAS, the parties are earnestly engaged in good faith discussions concerning a settlement of this action and the underlying dispute;

WHEREAS, the parties and their respective counsel previously requested and received from the Court a thirty-day suspension of all case deadlines and proceedings, including hearings already scheduled on this Court's calendar, to allow them to focus on their settlement discussions;

WHEREAS, the current thirty-day stay expires on July 18, 2007, and the parties believe that an additional thirty-day suspension of all case deadlines and proceedings will allow them to bring their settlement discussions to a close (the executives of the parties have met and agreed to a term sheet and a draft settlement agreement is currently circulating between counsel for the parties);

NOW THEREFORE, the parties, through their respective counsel of record, subject to the approval of the Court, hereby stipulate, agree, and jointly apply to the Court for an additional thirty-day stay of all deadlines and proceedings in this case. The hearing provisionally scheduled before the Honorable Ronald M. Whyte on August 17, 2007, and the hearings provisonally scheduled before the Honorable Richard Seeborg on August 1, 2007 and August 15, 2007, shall be rescheduled for September 21, 2007, September 5, 2007 and September 19, 2007, respectively, or such other dates subsequent to the aforesaid dates as Judge Whyte and Magistrate Judge Seeborg shall set. Unless the case is sooner dismissed, within five days of the expiration of the stay on August 15, 2007, the parties will file a report advising the Court of the status and outcome, if any, of their settlement discussions.

It is SO STIPULATED.

Filer's Attestation: Pursuant to General Order No. 45, § X(B), I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of the document has been obtained from each of its signatories.

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

XOFT, INC. v. CYTYC CORPORATION

United States District Court, N.D. California, San Jose Division
Jul 24, 2007
Case No. CV 05-05312 RMW (RS) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2007)

finding indefiniteness argument "necessarily fail[ed]" because party with burden of proof had offered no evidence suggesting one skilled in the art would not understand meaning of claim

Summary of this case from Volumetrics Med. Imaging, LLC v. Toshiba America Med. Sys. Inc.
Case details for

XOFT, INC. v. CYTYC CORPORATION

Case Details

Full title:XOFT, INC., Plaintiff, v. CYTYC CORPORATION and PROXIMA THERAPEUTICS…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. California, San Jose Division

Date published: Jul 24, 2007

Citations

Case No. CV 05-05312 RMW (RS) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2007)

Citing Cases

Volumetrics Med. Imaging, LLC v. Toshiba America Med. Sys. Inc.

Moreover, patents are to be construed from the perspective of one of ordinary skill in the art. Defendants'…