Free Appeal Document - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

A-ll (rev. 5/00) ` Page l ot`2
. USCA DOCKET # (IF KNOWN)
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING SYSTEM
PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES IF NECESSARY. .
TITLE IN FULLi DISTRICT: ARIZONA JUDGE: James A. Teilborg
Lexcel Solutions, Inc., ·
Plaintiff DISTRICT COURT NUMBER: CV-03-1454-PHX-JAT
V` _ DATE NOTICE OF APPEAL ` 9
MasterCard Imamatroaal, Inc. and MasterCard FILED; oarabar 17, 2005 IS THIS A oRoSS‘AP*’EAr· ® YES
International, L.L.C., both Delaware "
t. IF THIS MATTER HAS BEEN BEFORE THIS COURT PREVIOUSLY, PLEASE
oorporo ronS> PROVIDE THE DOCKET NUMBER AND CITATION (IF ANY);
Defendants.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF ACTON AND RESULT BELOW:
Plaintiff brought eight causes of action against defendants for breach of the non-exclusive license agreement,
copyright infringement, unfair competition, misappropriation under Missouri’s Trade Secret Act, declaratory relief,
and breach of fiduciary duty. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants as to all claims.
PRINCIPAL ISSUES PROPOSED TO BE RAISED ON APPEAL:
If the Ninth Circuit reverses the trial court’s Order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants on all of
laintiffs claims, then the issue on cross-a eal is did the trial court err in striking defendants affirmative defenses
P _ PP _
of estoppel, waiver, laches, and statute of limitations.
PLEASE IDENTIFY ANY OTHER LEGAL PROCEEDING THAT MAY HAVE A BEARING ON THIS CASE (INCLUDE PENDING DISTRICT
COURT POSTJUDGMENT MOTIONS)r
Defendants moved for an award of attomeys’ fees pursuant to l7 U.S.C. § 505 of the Copyright Act of 1976 on the
copyright claim and related claims, and pursuant to a mandatory fee provision in the parties’ written agreement that
requires payment of reasonable fees to the prevailing party for actions commenced to "const1ue or enforce" any
provision of the agreement. ·
DOES THIS APPEAL INVOLVE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING: No
I:] Possibility of settlement
Ij Likelihood that intervening precedent will control outcome of appeal
E Likelihood of a motion to expedite or to stay the appeal, or other procedural matters (Specify)
EI Any other information relevant to the inclusion of this case in the Mediation Program _
III Possibility parties would stipulate to binding award by Appellate Commissioner in lieu of submission to judges
LOWER COURT INFORMATION
Case 2:03-cv—01454—JAT Document 161 Filed 10/17/2005 Page 1 of 3 `

I Page 2 of 2
JURISDICTION DISTRICT COURT DISPOSITION I
FEDERAL APPELLATE TYPE OF JUDGMENT /ORDER APPEALED RELIEF
E] FEDERAL lg FINAL DECISION OF |:| DEFAULT JUDGMENT [I] DAMAGES:
QUESTION DISTRICT COURT
Q DISMISSAL/JURISDICTION SOUGHT $ IIIISIIFCIIICCI
. AWARDED $ 0
El DIVERSITY |;| INTERLOCUTORY E] DISMISSAL/MERITS |:| INJUNCTIONS:
DECISION APPEALABLE
AS OF RIGIIF K] SUMMARY JUDGMENT KI PRELIMINARY
A D OTHER _ |:| PERMANENT
(SPECIFY): [I] JUDGMENT/COURT DECISION
E1 INFFRLOCUFORY Q JUDGMENT/JURY VERDICT Q GRANTED
ORDER CERTIFIED BY
DISTRICT JUDGE E] DECLARATORY JUDGMENT lj DENIED
(SPECIFY):
lj JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF
LAW [Xl ATTORNEY FEES:
` D OTHER OTHER (SPECIFY): Q souGHT $ unspecified
(SPECIFY): AWARDED $ 0
IE COSTS PENDINGZ
S 1 0,7 l 6.22
CERTIFICATION OF COUNSEL
_ I CERTIFY THAT:
l. COPIES OF ORDER/JUDGMENT APPEALED FROM ARE ATTACHED.
2. A CURRENT SERVICE LIST OR REPRESENTATION STATEMENT WITH TELEPHONE AND FAX NUMBERS IS
ATTACHED (SEE 9TH CIR. RULE 3-2).
3. A COPY OF THIS CIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING STATEMENT WAS SERVED IN COMPLIANCE WITH FRAP 25.
4. I °UNDERSTAN"D THAT FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THESE FILING REQUIREMENTS MAY RESULT IN
SANCTIONS, INCLUDING DISMISSAL OF THIS APPEAL.
Monica A. Limon—W5@ October 17, 2005
. Signature Date
I COUNSEL WHO COMPLETED THIS FORM —

NAME Monica A. Limon-Wynn
FIRM¤ Snell & Wilmer LLP
ADDRFSR One Arizona Center, 400 E. Van Buren Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2202
F·IVIAII-¤ mlimon-w@[email protected]
TELEPHONE: 602 382-6390
FAX¤ 602 382-6070
THIS DOCUMENT SHOULD BE FILED IN THE DISTRICT COURT WITH THE NOTICE OF APPEAL
IF FILED LATE, IT SHOULD BE FILED DIRECTLY WITH THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS _
Case 2:03-cv-01454-JAT Document 161 Filed 10/17/2005 Page 2 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 17th day of October, 2005, I caused the attached document to be
electronically transmitted to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for tiling and transmittal of a
Notice of Electronic Filing.
• Steven S Boyd .
[email protected]@lockeliddell.com
• Thomas Cummings
[email protected] [email protected]
• Nathaniel C Dunn
[email protected]
• Sid Leach
[email protected] [email protected]
• Monica Anne Limon-Wynn
[email protected] [email protected],[email protected]
I I hereby certify that on the 17th day of October, 2005, I served the attached document by mail .
on the following who are not registered participants:
Graham Hill
Locke Liddell & Sapp LLP
600 Travis St.
Ste. 3400
Houston, TX 77002-3095
Donald John Lenkszus
Donald J. Lenkszus PC
P.O. Box 3064
Carefree, AZ 85377-3064
Michael O. Sutton
1 - Locke Liddell & Sapp LLP ·
600 Travis St.
Ste. 3400 -
Houston, TX 77002-3095 .
s/ Linda Patenaude .
1739484.1
Case 2:03-cv-01454-JAT Document 161 Filed 10/17/2005 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01454-JAT

Document 161

Filed 10/17/2005

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01454-JAT

Document 161

Filed 10/17/2005

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01454-JAT

Document 161

Filed 10/17/2005

Page 3 of 3