Netflix, Inc. v. Blockbuster, Inc.

Filing 60

STIPULATION re 58 MOTION to Intervene Stipulation Continuing Hearing & [Proposed] Order by Netflix, Inc.. (Ramani, Ashok) (Filed on 10/20/2006)

Download PDF
Netflix, Inc. v. Blockbuster, Inc. Doc. 60 Case 3:06-cv-02361-WHA Document 60 Filed 10/20/2006 Page 1 of 3 2 DARLYN J. DURll - #169825 ASHOK RAANI - #200020 3 71 0 Sansome Street 1 KEKER & V AN NEST, LLP JEFFREY R. CHANIN - #103649 San Francisco, CA 94111-1704 4 Telephone: (415) 391-5400 Facsimile: (415) 397-7188 5 Attorneys for Plaintiff 6 NETFLIX, INC. 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 NETFLIX, INC., a Delaware corporation, 11 Case No. C 06 2361 WHA Plaintiff, 12 STIPULATION CONTINUING HEARING & (PROPOSED) ORDER v. 13 BLOCKBUSTER, INC., a Delaware Defendant. 14 corporation, DOES 1-50, 15 Complaint fied: April 4, 2006 Date: TBD Time: TBD Dept: Courtroom 9, 19th Floor Judge: Hon. William H. Alsup 16 AN RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS 17 18 19. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 382687.01 STIPULATION CONTINING HEARIG & (PROPOSED) ORDER CASE NO. C 06 2361 WHA Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:06-cv-02361-WHA Document 60 Filed 10/20/2006 Page 2 of 3 1 WHEREAS, on October 11,2006, proposed intervenor Dennis Dilbeck ("Dilbeck") filed 2 a motion requesting to intervene in this case, with a hearing date set for November 16,2006; 3 WHEREAS, Plaintiff and counterclaim defendant Netflix, Inc. ("Netfix") and defendant 4 and counterclaimant Blockbuster Inc. ("Blockbuster") were not aware of Dilbeck's request to 5 intervene until they received his motion through the Court's Electronic Case Filing system; 6 WHEREAS, the parties therefore have been permitted only two weeks to consider their 7 position on the proposed intervention and submit briefing on their position, and additional time 8 to consider and brief the issues presented by Dilbeck's request for inteiyention would be helpful 9 to the parties and wil enhance their ability to assist the Court in reaching a decision on the 10 motion through their briefing; 11 WHEREAS, counsel for Dilbeck Scott Kamber has stated to Netfix's counsel Ashok 12 Ramani and Blockbuster's counsel Willam O'Brien today that he does not oppose this request 13 for continuance of the hearing; 14 WHEREAS, no changes in the schedule of this case would be necessitated by continuing 15 this hearing; 16 WHEREAS, the only previous modifications of time in this case were to allow 17 Blockbuster additional time to respond to Netfix's complaint; 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 382687.01 STIPULATION CONTINING HEARING & (PROPOSED) ORDER CASE NO. C 06 2361 WHA Case 3:06-cv-02361-WHA Document 60 Filed 10/20/2006 Page 3 of 3 1 THEREFORE, Netflx and Blockbuster respectfully request that this Court enter an order 2 continuing the date for the hearing on Dilbeck's motion until November 30,2006 at 8 a.m., and 3 with the briefing schedule being adjusted accordingly under the Local Rules. 4 5 Dated: October 19, 2006 Respectfully submitted, 6 7 8 KEKER & V AN NEST, LLP By: Isl Ashok Ramani Attorneys For Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant NETFLIX, INC. 9 10 11 Dated: October 19, 2006 Respectfully submitted, ALSCHULER GROSSMAN STEIN & KAHAN LLP 12 13 By: ();//a,l 0 8rieyl ~ Attorneys For Defendant and Counterclaimant BLOCKBUSTER INC. 14 15 16 Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 18 Dated: 19 20 21 By: THE HON. WILLIAM H. ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 382687.01 STIPULATION CONTINING HEARING & (PROPOSED) ORDER CASE NO. C 06 2361 WHA

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?