Asis Internet Services et al v. Active Response Group, Inc.

Filing 70

STIPULATION AND ORDER relating to stay. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 09/23/08. (rbe, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/24/2008)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

THOMAS R. BURKE (CA State Bar No. 141930) RONALD LONDON (admitted pro hac vice) AMBIKA K. DORAN (admitted pro hac vice) DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant ACTIVE RESPONSE GROUP, INC.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
ASIS INTERNET SERVICES, a California corporation, and JOEL HOUSEHOLTER, d/b/a KNEELAND ENGINEERING, d/b/a FOGGY.NET, Plaintiffs, v. ACTIVE RESPONSE GROUP, INC. et al. Defendants. ) Case No. CV 07-6211 TEH ) ) STIPULATION RELATING TO STAY ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

On September 16, 2008, the Court certified its July 30, 2008 decision pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) and stayed the proceedings in this Court pending decision on the appeal, or, if the Court of Appeal does not grant permission for interlocutory appeal, pending Ninth Circuit s decision in Asis Internet Servs. v. Azoogle.com, Inc., Case No. 0815979. September 16, 2008 Order, the parties stipulate as follows: (1) Defendant Active Response Group, Inc., having already issued a litigation hold to Pursuant to the

its employees, will preserve all evidence relevant to this dispute during the pendency of the stay. (2) Plaintiffs Asis Internet Services and Joel Householter may file the proposed

Second Amended Complaint, adding two defendants, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A; (3) After the new defendants have appeared, if Plaintiffs wish to propound discovery

requests on third parties not yet named in the action that are not subject to the preservation order,
Stipulation Relating to Stay 2 CV 07-6211 TEH

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

and such discovery is necessary to the preservation of evidence, Plaintiffs and Defendant shall meet and confer to address the concerns. Plaintiffs shall not serve any third-party subpoenas or other discovery without the consent of Defendant. If the parties cannot reach agreement

regarding such concerns after fully meeting and conferring, either party may apply to the Court for a hearing regarding the same; and (4) All other activity in the case, including all discovery not referenced in paragraph (3), shall remain stayed. So stipulated. Dated: September 22, 2008 SINGLETON LAW GROUP __/s/ Jason Singleton ___________ Jason K. Singleton Richard E. Grabowski Attorneys for Plaintiffs ASIS INTERNET SERVICES and JOEL HOUSEHOLTER, dba FOGGY.NET DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP __/s/ Ambika Doran_________________________ Thomas R. Burke Ronald London (admitted pro hac vice) Ambika K. Doran (admitted pro hac vice) Attorneys for Defendant ACTIVE RESPONSE GROUP, INC. ORDER It is so ordered.

DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Stipulation Relating to Stay

J

3

ER

A

N

09/23/08

D IS T IC T R

OF

C

LI
CV 07-6211 TEH

FO

e lton E. H dge The u

nderson

R NIA

__________________________________ Hon. Thelton E. Henderson United States District Court Judge

UNIT ED

Dated: September __, 2008.

S

S DISTRICT TE C TA

RT U O

NO

RT

H