New Pacer--STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE AND
EXPAND PAGE LIMITS FOR CLAIM
CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING [RELATED CASES]
(Signed By Judge)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
ACER, INC., ACER AMERICA
CORPORATION and GATEWAY, INC.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED,
PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION,
and ALLIACENSE LIMITED,
Defendants.

STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE AND
EXPAND PAGE LIMITS FOR CLAIM
CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING [RELATED CASES]

HTC CORPORATION, HTC AMERICA,
INC.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED,
PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION,
and ALLIACENSE LIMITED,
Defendants.

BARCO N.V., a Belgian corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LTD.,
PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORP.,
ALLIACENSE LTD.,
Defendants.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
IT IS SO ORDERED (Signed By Judge)
James Ware

- 1 - Case Nos. 5:08-cv-00877, 5:08-cv-00882, 5:08-cv-05398
STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE AND EXPAND PAGE LIMITS FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING
On November 23, 2010, Judge Fogel granted a stipulated request expanding page limits for
claim construction briefing for the parties Acer, Inc., Acer America, Inc. and Gateway, Inc.
(collectively “Acer”) (Dkt. 211), Barco, N.V. (“Barco”) (Dkt. 114), HTC Corp. and HTC America,
Inc. (collectively “HTC”) (Dkt. 227) (Acer, Barco and HTC collectively “Plaintiffs”) and
Technology Properties Ltd., Patriot Scientific Corp. and Alliacense, Ltd. (collectively “TPL” or
“Defendants”). In particular, this Court permitted the page limits under Local Rules 7-2, 7-3 and
7-4 on the parties’ claim construction briefs to be expanded as follows:
1. The page limit of Defendants’ opening brief was expanded from 25 to 30 pages;
2. The page limit of Plaintiffs’ combined responsive brief was expanded from 25 to 35
pages; and
3. The page limit of Defendants’ reply brief was expanded from 15 to 20 pages.
Plaintiffs and Defendants are uncertain as to whether the stipulated request of November 23,
2010 remains in effect. Accordingly, Plaintiffs and Defendants, pursuant to Northern District of
California Civil Local Rule 7-12, make this stipulated request for an order consolidating and
expanding the page limits for claim construction briefing:
WHEREAS, the parties met and conferred and agreed that each side, Plaintiffs and
Defendants, will submit combined briefs;
WHEREAS, the parties have further agreed that the page limits provided in Northern
District Local Rules 7-2, 7-3 and 7-4 should be expanded for this combined briefing;
ACCORDINGLY, it is HEREBY STIPULATED by and among the parties and their
counsel of record, who respectfully request that the Court expand the page limits under Local
Rules 7-2, 7-3 and 7-4 on the parties’ claim construction briefs as follows:
1. The page limit of Plaintiffs’ combined responsive brief is expanded from 25 to 30
pages; and
2. The page limit of Defendants’ reply brief is expanded from 15 to 20 pages.
Dated: January 5, 2012 AGILITY IP LAW, LLP
By: ___/s/_James Otteson_______________
James C. Otteson
Attorneys for Defendants TECHNOLOGY
PROPERTIES LIMITED and ALLIACENSE
LIMITED
Dated: January 5, 2012 KIRBY NOONAN LANCE &HOGE
By: __/s/_Charles Hoge______________
Charles T. Hoge
Attorneys for Defendant PATRIOT
SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION
Dated: January 5, 2012 K&L GATES LLP
By: /s/ Timothy Walker
Timothy P. Walker, Esq.
Howard Chen, Esq.
Harold H. Davis, Jr., Esq.
Jas Dhillon, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Ratinoff
K&L Gates LLP
Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200
San Francisco, CA 94111
Attorneys for Acer, Inc., Acer America Corp.
and Gateway, Inc.

STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE AND EXPAND PAGE LIMITS FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING
Dated: January 5, 2012
COOLEY LLP
By: /s/ Kyle Chen
Kyle D. Chen, Esq.
Heidi L. Keefe, Esq.
Mark R. Weinstein, Esq.
Cooley LLP
3000 El Camino Real
Five Palo Alto Square, 4th Floor
Palo Alto, California 94306
Attorneys for HTC Corporation and HTC
America, Inc.
Dated: January 5, 2012 BAKER & MCKENZIE
By: /s/ Edward Runyan
Edward Runyan, Esq.
Baker & McKenzie
130 East Randolph Drive
Chicago, IL 60601
Attorneys for Barco, N.V.
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: ________________, 2012 _______________________________
(Signed By Judge)
Hon. James Ware
United States District Court Judge