Motion To Continue Case Management Conference (Civil Local Rule 6-3)
Motion To Continue Case Management Conference (Civil Local Rule 6-3)
Motion To Continue Case Management Conference (Civil Local Rule 6-3)
12
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT
OHS West:260550679.1
CONFERENCE
15075-2017 R23/DZF C-08-03343 SI
Case 3:08-cv-03343-SI Document 46 Filed 11/14/2008 Page 2 of 4
1 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-3 and the Court’s standing order, defendant NVIDIA
2 Corporation hereby respectfully requests an order continuing the date of the initial Case
3 Management Conference in this action for approximately 18 days, from December 5, 2008 to
4 December 23, 2008, or such other day thereafter as may be convenient for the Court. A
5 continuance will serve the interests of justice and promote judicial efficiency for the following
6 two reasons:
7 1. On November 6, 2008, Rambus filed a complaint against NVIDIA and many of its
8 customers before the United States International Trade Commission involving nine of the patents-
9 in-suit in this action. The ITC is expected to issue its decision as to whether or not it will institute
10 an investigation of the matters raised by the Rambus complaint on December 8, 2008, thirty days
11 after Rambus’s complaint was filed. Should the ITC institute an investigation, then pursuant to
12 28 U.S.C. §1659(a), NVIDIA would be entitled to stay this action as to the patents overlapping in
13 the two proceedings, and a stay of this entire action would be within the discretion of this Court.1
14 Accordingly, until at least December 8th, the parties and this Court are faced with substantial
15 uncertainties regarding the scope and nature of this case that make case management options both
16 hypothetical and difficult to evaluate.
17 2. In addition, as the Court is aware, another action between these parties is now pending
18 in the Middle District of North Carolina, NVIDIA Corporation v. Rambus, Inc., 08-00473 (“the
19 Carolina Action). Rambus has filed a motion to dismiss the Carolina Action and a motion to
20 transfer it to this Court. Those motions are fully briefed and will either be set for hearing by the
21 Carolina court, or decided without hearing, in the Carolina court’s discretion. Although NVIDIA
22 believes those motions should be denied, were the Carolina court to decide that the matter before
23 it should be transferred to this Court, that would necessarily have a significant impact on the
24 scope and nature of the dispute between the parties that will be litigated in this forum, with broad
25
1
See 28 U.S.C. §1659(a) (“the district court shall stay, until the determination of the Commission
26 becomes final, proceedings in the civil action with respect to any claim that involves the same
issues involved in the proceeding before the Commission . . . .”); see also Formfactor, Inc. v.
27 Micronics Japan Co., Ltd. 2008 WL 361128 (N.D. Cal. 2008) (staying entire patent infringement
action filed in Northern District of California in view of ITC complaint that alleged infringement
28 of two of the five patents that were at issue in the California action).
MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT
OHS West:260550679.1
15075-2017 R23/DZF
-2- CONFERENCE
C-08-03343 SI
Case 3:08-cv-03343-SI Document 46 Filed 11/14/2008 Page 3 of 4
1 Accordingly good cause exists for a brief continuance of the CMC to permit the parties
2 and the Court to obtain further information as to how the pending ITC proceeding and Rambus’s
3 request to transfer the Carolina action to this forum may impact this case.
4
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT
OHS West:260550679.1 -4- CONFERENCE
15075-2017 R23/DZF C-08-03343