EVOX Productions, LLC v. The Leland Stanford Junior University et al

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
REQUEST REGARDING FILING OF DEFENDANT’S
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 5:24-CV-09521-NW
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
Joseph Petersen (SBN 304597)
jpetersen@ktslaw.com
1302 El Camino Real, Suite 175
Menlo Park, California 94025
Telephone: (650) 614-6427
Facsimile: (650) 644-0570
Kollin J. Zimmermann (SBN 273092)
kzimmermann@ktslaw.com
1801 Century Park East, Suite 2300
Los Angeles, California 90067
Telephone: (310) 248-3830
Facsimile: (310) 860-0363
Sara K. Stadler (admitted pro hac vice)
sstadler@ktslaw.com
Briggs M. Wright (admitted pro hac vice)
briggs.wright@ktslaw.com
3 Times Square
New York, New York 10036
Telephone: (212) 775-8700
Facsimile: (212) 775-8800
Counsel for Defendant The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford
Junior University, sued as The Leland Stanford Junior University
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
EVOX PRODUCTIONS LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR
UNIVERSITY and DOES 1–10,
Defendants.
Case No. 5:24-cv-09521-NW
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED
ORDER] REGARDING FILING OF
DEFENDANT THE LELAND
STANFORD JUNIOR
UNIVERSITY’S FIRST AMENDED
ANSWER
Case 5:24-cv-09521-NW Document 90 Filed 10/13/26 Page 1 of 4

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 REQUEST REGARDING FILING OF DEFENDANT’S
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 5:24-cv-09521-NW
1
STIPULATION
WHEREAS, this action was filed on December 31, 2024 (Dkt. No. 1);
WHEREAS, Plaintiff EVOX Productions LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed the operative
Second Amended Complaint on November 19, 2025 (Dkt. No. 67), The Leland
Stanford Junior University (“Defendant”) filed a Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 68),
and the Court granted that motion in part on March 3, 2026 (Dkt. No. 74), after which
Defendant filed its Answer on March 31, 2026 (Dkt. No. 77);
WHEREAS, Defendant contends that information recently disclosed in
discovery provide grounds for the assertion of a statute of limitations affirmative
defense pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 507(b);
Plaintiff and Defendant, by and through their respective counsel, stipulate and
agree that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), Defendant shall be
permitted to file a First Amended Answer to assert a statute of limitations affirmative
defense pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 507(b). Defendant’s proposed First Amended Answer
is attached as Exhibit 1. A redlined version comparing the proposed First Amended
Answer to the current operative Answer is attached as Exhibit 2.
Case 5:24-cv-09521-NW Document 90 Filed 10/13/26 Page 2 of 4

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 REQUEST REGARDING FILING OF DEFENDANT’S
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 5:24-cv-09521-NW
2
IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.
DATED: October 8 th
, 2026 	Respectfully submitted,
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND &
STOCKTON LLP
By: 	/s/ Joseph Petersen
Joseph Petersen
Counsel for Defendant The Board of
Trustees of the Leland Stanford
Junior University, sued as The Leland
Stanford Junior University
DATED: October 8 th
, 2026 	Respectfully submitted,
CALLAHAN & BLAINE, APLC
By: 	/s/ Jason Casero
Jason Casero
Counsel for Plaintiff EVOX Productions
LLC
Case 5:24-cv-09521-NW Document 90 Filed 10/13/26 Page 3 of 4

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 REQUEST REGARDING FILING OF DEFENDANT’S
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 5:24-cv-09521-NW
3
ATTESTATION CLAUSE REGARDING SIGNATURES
Pursuant to N.D. Cal. Civil L.R. 5-1(i)(3) regarding signatures, I, Joseph
Petersen, attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained
from the other signatories, as indicated by a “confirmed” signature (/s/) within the e-
filed document. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United
States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on October 8th
, 2026.
By:/s/ Joseph Petersen
Joseph Petersen
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Having considered the Parties’ stipulation, the Court ORDERS that Defendant
may file its First Amended Answer to assert a statute of limitations affirmative
defense pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 507(b).
DATED: _____________, 2026
HON. NOËL WISE
United States District Judge
The Court accepts the First Amended Answer as
file, ECF No. 89-1.
October 13
Case 5:24-cv-09521-NW Document 90 Filed 10/13/26 Page 4 of 4