Case 8:19-cv-01150-DOC-KES Document 106 Filed 07/02/21 Page 1 of 3 Page ID #:1615
`
`
`
`
`Aaron S. Jacobs (Cal. Bar No. 214953)
`ajacobs@princelobel.com
`James J. Foster
`jfoster@princelobel.com
`PRINCE LOBEL TYE LLP
`One International Place, Suite 3700
`Boston, MA 02110
`Tel: (617) 456-8000
`
`Matthew D. Vella (Cal. State Bar No. 314548)
`mvella@princelobel.com
`PRINCE LOBEL TYE LLP
`357 S. Coast Highway, Suite 200
`Laguna Beach, CA 92651
`Tel: (949) 232-6375
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SANTA ANA DIVISION
`
`
`UNILOC 2017 LLC,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`INFOR, INC. ET AL.,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendants.
`
`Case No. 8:19-cv-01150-DOC-KES
`
`(CONSOLIDATED)
`
`STIPULATION TO STAY PENDING
`APPEAL
`
`
`
`
`
`This is a consolidated case concerning two patents owned by Plaintiff, Uniloc
`
`2017 LLC. The Court has entered Orders granting stipulations of voluntary dismissal
`
`with prejudice as to the claims pending between Uniloc 2017 LLC and the Infor, Inc.
`
`and Netsuite Inc. defendants. See Dkt. 71 (dismissing claims between Uniloc 2017
`
`and Infor), Dkt. 92 (dismissing claims between Uniloc 2017 and Netsuite).
`
`24
`
`
`
`The claims between Uniloc 2017 and the following defendants remain pending
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`in this consolidated action: Square Enix, Inc. and Square Enix LLC; Square Enix
`
`Holdings Co. Ltd. and Square Enix Co., Ltd.; Ubisoft, Inc. (the “Remaining
`
`Defendants”). On March 18, 2021, the Court granted in part counter-defendant
`
`Ubisoft Inc.’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, “dismiss[ing] with prejudice
`
`STIPULATION TO STAY PENDING APPEAL
`3836559.v1
`
`
`
`Case No. 8:19-cv-01150-DOC-KES
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-01150-DOC-KES Document 106 Filed 07/02/21 Page 2 of 3 Page ID #:1616
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`Uniloc’s claims for patent infringement relating to Ubisoft’s use of the Akamai
`
`CDN.” Dkt. 103. The Court issued a Scheduling Order in this case on June 21,
`
`3
`
`2021. Dkt. 105.
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
` Uniloc 2017 has informed the Remaining Defendants of the attached decision
`
`in Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Google LLC (N.D. CA, Case No. 4:20-cv-04355, and various
`
`related cases) (the “Google Order”). That court held that a third party had the ability
`
`to sublicense the patents in the Uniloc portfolio as of the dates those actions were
`
`filed; that that ability deprived Uniloc 2017 of constitutional standing to file the
`
`actions; and that the court therefore did not have subject matter jurisdiction. As a
`
`10
`
`result, that court dismissed the actions, and Uniloc 2017 is appealing that decision.
`
`11
`
`Fed. Cir. Appeal No. 2021-1498.
`
`12
`
`Uniloc 2017 believes that an appellate decision upholding the Google Order
`
`13
`
`will require dismissal of this case against the Remaining Defendants for lack of
`
`14
`
`subject matter jurisdiction. Thus, Uniloc 2017 believes the Court cannot proceed
`
`15
`
`until the Federal Circuit resolves those issues, and has requested that the Remaining
`
`16
`
`Defendants stipulate to a stay pending the appeal.
`
`17
`
`Uniloc 2017 and the Remaining Defendants therefore STIPULATE, with the
`
`18
`
`consent of the Court, to stay these actions until the United States Court of Appeals for
`
`19
`
`the Federal Circuit issues a decision on the appeal of the Google Order. If the
`
`20
`
`Federal Circuit affirms the Google Order, within fourteen days after the mandate
`
`21
`
`issues Uniloc 2017 will move this Court to dismiss this lawsuit in its entirety for lack
`
`22
`
`of subject matter jurisdiction. Uniloc 2017 further stipulates that any future litigation
`
`23
`
`brought by Uniloc 2017 (or its successors in interest, if applicable) against the
`
`24
`
`Remaining Defendants or their affiliates on the patents-in-suit must proceed in the
`
`25
`
`Central District of California, and that Uniloc 2017 and any of its successors in
`
`26
`
`interest will not re-file its claims, or any new claims based on the same patents, in
`
`27
`
`any other judicial district.
`
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`STIPULATION TO STAY PENDING APPEAL
`
`2
`
`Case No. 8:19-cv-01150-DOC-KES
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-01150-DOC-KES Document 106 Filed 07/02/21 Page 3 of 3 Page ID #:1617
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Michelle L. Marriott
`Michelle L. Marriott (pro hac vice)
`michelle.marriott@eriseip.com
`Eric A. Buresh (pro hac vice)
`eric.buresh@eriseip.com
`Mark C.Lang (pro hac vice)
`mark.lang@eriseip.com
`ERISE IP, P.A.
`7015 College Blvd., Suite 700
`Overland Park, KS 66211
`Telephone: 913.777.5600
`Facsimile: 913.777.5601
`
`Stephen S. Smith (SBN 166539)
`ssmith@stephensmithlaw.com
`LAW OFFICES OF STEPHEN S.
`SMITH, P.C.
`30700 Russell Ranch Rd., Ste. 250
`Westlake Village, CA 91362
`Phone: (310) 955-5824
`Fax: (310) 955-5824
`
`Attorneys for Ubisoft, Inc. and
`Square Enix Co., Ltd. and Square Enix
`Holdings Co., Ltd.
`
`
`Dated: July 2, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ James J. Foster
`Aaron S. Jacobs (Cal. Bar No. 214953)
`ajacobs@princelobel.com
`James J. Foster
`jfoster@princelobel.com
`PRINCE LOBEL TYE LLP
`One International Place, Suite 3700
`Boston, MA 02110
`Tel: (617) 456-8000
`
`Matthew D. Vella (Cal. State Bar No.
`314548)
`mvella@princelobel.com
`PRINCE LOBEL TYE LLP
`357 S. Coast Highway, Suite 200
`Laguna Beach, CA 92651
`Tel: (949) 232-6375
`
`Attorneys for Uniloc 2017 LLC
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`STIPULATION TO STAY PENDING APPEAL
`
`1
`
`Case No. 8:19-cv-01150-DOC-KES
`
`