Mark Mishak v. Google, Inc. et al

Filing 9

FIRST STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Lycos, Inc. answer now due 3/20/2008, filed by Defendant Lycos, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Page, Michael)

Download PDF
Mark Mishak v. Google, Inc. et al Doc. 9 Case 2:07-cv-08258-CAS-JCR Document 9 Filed 02/14/2008 Page 1 of 2 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 KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP MICHAEL H. PAGE - #154913 710 Sansome Street San Francisco, CA 94111-1704 Telephone: (415) 391-5400 Facsimile: (415) 397-7188 Attorneys for Defendant LYCOS, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SANTA ANA DIVISION MARK MISHAK, dba INEEDATV.COM, Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE, INC., AMERICAN ONLINE, INC., NETSCAPE, INC., MICROSOFT NETWORK, INC., ASK JEEVES, INC. EXCITE, INC., WEBCRAWLER, INC., YAHOO, INC., CONVERSA, INC., LYCOS, INC., HOTBOT INC., ALTAVISTA INC., CRAIGSLIST INC., RESPOND INC., INFOSEEK INC., YELLOW PAGES INC., PLANETSEARCH INC., PRONET INC., NORTHERNLIGHT INC., LUCKYSURF INC., COMFIND INC., LIQUIDPRICE INC., EARTHLINK INC., DOES 1-100, Defendants. Case No. CV07-8258 CAS (JCRx) STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT LYCOS, INC. TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE PLEAD IN RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Judge: The Honorable Christina A. Snyder Date Comp. Filed: December 20, 2007 WHEREAS: 1. Plaintiff Mark Mishak d/b/a INEEDATV.com ("Plaintiff") filed this action on December 20, 2007; 2. Defendant Lycos' responsive pleading is currently due, pursuant to this Court's Order, on February 19, 2008; /// 1 STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT LYCOS, INC. TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE PLEAD IN RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT CASE NO. CV07-8258 CAS (JCRx) Dockets.Justia.com 411323.01 Case 2:07-cv-08258-CAS-JCR Document 9 Filed 02/14/2008 Page 2 of 2 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 3. in this action; 4. None of the other Defendants in this action have been served with the Complaint Plaintiff is currently considering whether to dismiss or amend his complaint, and requires additional time to consult with counsel; and 5. In the event this action is not dismissed, the parties and Court will avoid duplication of effort if there is a single, unified response date for all Defendants. NOW THEREFORE, Defendant Lycos, Inc., through its attorneys, and Plaintiff Mark Mishak, through his attorneys, hereby stipulate and agree that the time for Defendant to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint shall be extended a further 30 days, up to and including March 20, 2008, and request that this Court enter the accompanying proposed order to that effect. Dated: February 14, 2008 KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP /s/ Michael H. Page By: __________________________________ MICHAEL H. PAGE Attorneys for Defendant LYCOS, INC. Dated: February 14, 2008 LAW OFFICE OF ROGER JAMES AGAJANIAN /s/ Roger James Agajanian By: __________________________________ ROGER JAMES AGAJANIAN Attorneys for Plaintiff MARK MISHAK, dba INEEDATV.COM 2 411323.01 STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT LYCOS, INC. TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE PLEAD IN RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT CASE NO. CV07-8258 CAS (JCRx)

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?