Don Henley et al v. Charles S Devore et al

Filing 85

Joint STIPULATION to Continue Pretrial Conference and Trial Date from June 21, 2010 and July 6, 2010 to July 19, 2010 and August 3, 2010 filed by Plaintiffs and Counterdefendants Mike Campbell, Don Henley, Danny Kortchmar. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Whitney, Craig)

Don Henley et al v. Charles S Devore et al

Doc. 85

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

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP JACQUELINE C. CHARLESWORTH (pro hac vice) [e-mail] CRAIG B. WHITNEY (CA SBN 217673) [e-mail] 1290 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10104 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 212.468.7900 PAUL GOLDSTEIN (CA SBN 79613) [e-mail] 559 Nathan Abbott Way Stanford, California 94305-8610 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 650.327.0811 Attorneys for Plaintiffs ONE LLP CHRISTOPHER W. ARLEDGE (CA SBN 200767) [e-mail] JOHN TEHRANIAN (CA SBN 211616) [e-mail] 4000 MacArthur Blvd. West Tower, Suite 1100 Newport Beach, California 92660 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 949.258.5081 Attorneys for Defendants UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DON HENLEY, MIKE CAMPBELL and DANNY KORTCHMAR, v. Plaintiffs, Case No. SACV09-0481 JVS (RNBx) Hon. James V. Selna JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE, PRETRIAL CONFERENCE AND TRIAL DATES [Filed Concurrently With Proposed Order]

CHARLES S. DEVORE and JUSTIN HART, Defendants.

Dockets.Justia.com

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

WHEREAS, on July 28, 2009, the parties submitted their Joint Report Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), which provides, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 16-15.4, that the parties have agreed to appear before the Magistrate Judge assigned to this case for a settlement conference; WHEREAS, on August 10, 2009, the Court issued the Civil Minutes regarding the Scheduling Conference ("Civil Minutes"), scheduling the trial and the Final Pretrial Conference for July 6, 2010 and June 21, 2010, respectively; WHEREAS, pursuant to the Civil Minutes, the parties were required to file motions for summary judgment no later than April 19, 2010, to be heard no later than May 17, 2010; WHEREAS, on January 12, 2010, the Court ordered the parties to complete settlement discussions no later than May 21, 2010; WHEREAS, on April 9, 2010, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, setting the hearing date for May 17, 2010, in accordance with the Civil Minutes; WHEREAS, on April 20, 2010, the Court, acting sua sponte, continued the hearing on the motions to June 1, 2010; WHEREAS, the remaining issues in this case concern Plaintiffs' claims for willful infringement in violation of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq., and Plaintiff Henley's claim for false association in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); WHEREAS, Plaintiffs are seeking partial summary judgment on Defendants' liability for those claims, and Defendants are seeking summary judgment dismissing those claims; WHEREAS, in response to the copyright claim, Defendants have asserted a defense of fair use, and in particular that their use of the Plaintiffs' works constitutes

1

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

parody, which the parties agree is a question of law for the Court that is appropriately decided on summary judgment; WHEREAS, the parties have each asserted that there are no genuine issues as to any material fact, and that the Court can resolve the issues of liability as to the copyright and Lanham Act claims on summary judgment; WHEREAS, the Court's determination regarding these claims could reduce and/or clarify substantially the remaining issues for trial; WHEREAS, as the schedule now stands, the parties' motions in limine are due on May 31, 2010, before the hearing on the parties' summary judgment motions; WHEREAS, the parties believe it would be wasteful of the Court's and the parties' time and resources to brief, and potentially argue, motions in limine, as well as the remaining pretrial submissions, prior to the Court's ruling on the parties' summary judgment motions; WHEREAS, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) and Local Rule 16-9, the parties respectfully request a modest continuation of the trial and Final Pretrial Conference dates, as well as the due dates for the motions in limine and other pretrial documents, by four weeks, or by such other amount of time that the Court deems appropriate under the circumstances; WHEREAS, the parties are further in agreement that this case is not ripe for settlement while their respective summary judgment motions are pending, and that settlement discussions would not be productive; and WHEREAS, the parties therefore believe that preparation for and participation in settlement discussions prior to the Court's ruling on the summary judgment motions would be wasteful of the Court's and the parties' time and resources; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the parties, through their undersigned counsel of record, subject to the Court's approval, that:
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

1.

The schedule set forth in the Civil Minutes, and the Order for Jury Trial, (a) (b) (c) (d) The parties shall file motions in limine no later than June 28, 2010, The parties shall file pretrial documents no later than July 12, 2010, The Final Pretrial Conference shall be set for July 19, 2010 at 11:00 The trial shall be set for August 3, 2010 at 8:30 a.m., or such other

dated August 11, 2009, shall be modified as follows: or such other time that the Court deems appropriate; or such other time that the Court deems appropriate; a.m., or such other time that the Court deems appropriate; time that the Court deems appropriate; 2. Within seven (7) days following the entry of the Court's order deciding the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment, the parties shall contact the Magistrate Judge to schedule a settlement conference; and 3. The parties shall file all necessary documents and complete such settlement discussions no later than thirty (30) days following entry of the Court's order deciding the parties' summary judgment motions, subject to the availability of the Magistrate Judge and any further order of the Court.

3

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

Dated:

May 21, 2010

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP Jacqueline C. Charlesworth Craig B. Whitney Paul Goldstein

By:

/s/ Craig B. Whitney Craig B. Whitney

Attorneys for Plaintiffs DON HENLEY, MIKE CAMPBELL and DANNY KORTCHMAR Dated: May 21, 2010 ONE LLP Christopher W. Arledge Peter Afrasiabi John Tehranian

By:

/s/ Christopher W. Arledge Christopher W. Arledge

Attorneys for Defendants CHARLES S. DEVORE and JUSTIN HART

4