MP Nexlevel of CA, Inc. v. CVIN, LLC, et al.
Filing
285
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DEADLINE TO FILE OPPOSITION AND REPLY RE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; ORDER signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on May 18, 2016. (Munoz, I)
1 DOWLING AARON INCORPORATED
Steven D. McGee (State Bar No. 71886)
2 smcgee@dowlingaaron.com
Matthew R. Dildine (SBN 258685)
3 mdildine@dowlingaaron.com
8080 North Palm Avenue, Third Floor
4 Fresno, CA 93729-8902
Telephone: 559-432-4500
5 Facsimile: 559-432-4590
6 William T. Eliopoulos (State Bar No. 100633)
weliopoulos@rutan.com
7 Kaveh Badiei (State Bar No. 215179)
kbadiei@rutan.com
8 RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP
Five Palo Alto Square
9 3000 El Camino Real, Suite 200
Palo Alto, CA 94306-9814
10 Telephone: 650-320-1500
Facsimile: 650-320-9905
11
Heather N. Herd (State Bar No. 217521)
12 hherd@rutan.com
RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP
13 611 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1400
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
14 Telephone: 714-641-5100
Facsimile: 714-546-9035
15
Attorneys for Defendant and Counter and Cross16 Claimant
CVIN, LLC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
17
18
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
19
FRESNO DIVISION
20 MP NEXLEVEL of California, Inc.,
21
Plaintiff,
vs.
22
Case No. 1:14-cv-00288-LJO-GSA
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE
DEADLINE TO FILE OPPOSITION
AND REPLY RE PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT; ORDER
CVIN, LLC dba VAST NETWORKS,
23 CALAVERAS COMMUNICATIONS
COMPANY, CAL-ORE TELEPHONE
Date Action Filed: February 28, 2014
24 CO., CONSOLIDATED
COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS, INC., Trial Date:
July 25, 2017
25 DUCOR TELEPHONE COMPANY,
MOHAVE INVESTMENT, LLC,
26 SEBASTIAN ENTERPRISES, INC.,
SIERRA TEL BROADBAND, SIERRA
27 TEL COMMUNICATIONS GROUP,
STAGELINE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,
28 SUREWEST FIBER VENTURES, LLC,
THE PONDEROSA TELEPHONE
174/031672-0001
8779859.1 a05/18/16
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DEADLINE TO FILE
OPPOSITION AND REPLY RE MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT; ORDER
1 COMPANY, VARCOMM, INC.,
VARNET, INC., VOLCANO
2 COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY,
VOLCANO TELECOM, INC., and DOES 1
3 to 100,
Defendants.
4
5 AND RELATED COUNTER, CROSS-,
AND THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS.
6
7
8
WHEREAS on April 27, 2016, plaintiff and cross-defendant MP Nexlevel of
9 California, Inc. (“MPN”) noticed its Motion for Summary Judgment or in the Alternative
10 Partial Summary Judgment (the “Motion”) for hearing on May 25, 2016 (ECF 278);
11
WHEREAS on May 6, 2016, this Court: 1) vacated the May 25, 2016 hearing date;
12 2) ordered the deadline for filing defendant, counterclaimant and cross-complainant CVIN,
13 LLC’s (“CVIN”) opposition to the Motion (the “Opposition) continued to June 1, 2016
14 and; 3) ordered the deadline for filing MPN’s reply in support of the Motion (the “Reply”)
15 continued to June 15, 2016 (ECF 282);
16
WHEREAS the parties hereto agree, in order to accommodate the scheduling of
17 depositions, that: 1) the deadline for filing CVIN’s Opposition is continued to June 6, 2016
18 and 2) the deadline for filing MPN’s Reply is continued to June 20, 2016.
19
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the MPN and CVIN, by and
20 through their counsel of record, that: 1) the deadline for filing CVIN’s Opposition is
21 continued to June 6, 2016 and 2) the deadline for filing MPN’s Reply is continued to June
22 20, 2016.
23 IT IS SO STIPULATED.
24 Dated: May 17, 2016
RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP
25
By: /s/ Heather N. Herd
Heather N. Herd
Attorneys for Defendant,
Counterclaimant and Cross-Complainant
CVIN, LLC
26
27
28
174/031672-0001
8779859.1 a05/18/16
-1-
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DEADLINE TO FILE
OPPOSITION AND REPLY RE MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT; ORDER
1 Dated: May 17, 2016
2
GORDON & REES LLP
By: /s/ Ben Patrick
Ben Patrick
Attorneys for Plaintiff and CrossDefendant MP Nexlevel of California,
Inc.
3
4
5
6 IT IS SO ORDERED.
7
Dated:
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
May 18, 2016
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
174/031672-0001
8779859.1 a05/18/16
-2-
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DEADLINE TO FILE
OPPOSITION AND REPLY RE MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT; ORDER
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?