Advice Company v. Novak et al

Filing 55

ORDER To Extend Briefing Schedule Re: Defendants' Renewed Motion To Dimiss re 53 Stipulation filed by Attorney Yellow Pages.Com, LLC., James Novak Plaintiff's Opposition due by 12/15/2008. Defendants' Reply is due by 12/24/2008. Motion Hearing set for 1/16/2009 09:30 AM in Courtroom A, 15th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 11/14/08. (fj, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/17/2008)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Gordon & Rees LLP 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111 DION N. COMINOS (SBN: 136522) dcominos@gordonrees.com MARK C. RUSSELL (SBN: 208865) mrussell@gordonrees.com GORDON & REES LLP Embarcadero Center West 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 986-5900 Facsimile: (415) 986-8054 Attorneys for Defendants JAMES NOVAK and ATTORNEY YELLOW PAGES.COM LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ­ SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 12 13 14 15 16 17 ADVICE COMPANY, a California corporation, Plaintiff, vs. JAMES NOVAK, an individual, and ATTORNEY YELLOW PAGES.COM, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company, and DOES 110, Defendants. CASE NO. 3:08-cv-01951-JCS STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE RE: DEFENDANTS' RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS Date: Time: / Room: Judge: January 9, 2009 9:30 a.m. A Hon. Joseph C. Spero April 11, 2008 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PRST/1050945/6119267v.1 Complaint Filed: WHEREBY Defendants NOVAK and ATTORNEY YELLOW PAGES.COM, LLC ("Defendants") have filed a Renewed Motion for Dismissal set for hearing on January 9, 2009. WHEREBY the Court previously ordered a briefing scheduled requiring Plaintiff to file its Opposition brief by November 21, 2008 and Defendants to file their Reply by December 5, 2008 for the January 9, 2009 hearing. WHEREBY the parties have commenced discussions on whether a coexistence agreement can resolve all the disputes that form Plaintiff's complaint. -1STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS CASE NO. 3:08-cv-01951-JCS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Gordon & Rees LLP 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111 WHEREBY the parties have agreed to extend the filing dates of Plaintiff's Opposition to December 15, 2008 and Defendants' Reply until December 24, 2008 so that the parties have sufficient time to negotiate the details of the possible coexistence agreement. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys of record for the parties who have appeared in this action that the briefing schedule on the Defendants' Renewed Motion to Dismiss be extended as follows: Plaintiff's Opposition is due by December 15, 2008. Defendants' Reply is due by December 24, 2008. * Hearing moved to January 16, 2009 at 9:30 a.m. /s/JCS Dated: November 12, 2008 GORDON & REES LLP /s/ Mark C. Russell By: MARK C. RUSSELL Attorneys for Defendants JAMES NOVAK and ATTORNEY YELLOW PAGES.COM LLC Dated: November 12, 2008 ADVOCATE LAW GROUP, PC /s/ Gerry H. Goldsholle By: GERRY H. GOLDSHOLLE Attorneys for Plaintiff ADVICE COMPANY 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS -2CASE NO. 3:08-cv-01951-JCS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Gordon & Rees LLP 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111 [PROPOSED] ORDER The parties having stipulated to extend the briefing schedule on Defendants' Renewed Motion to Dismiss with Plaintiff's Opposition due by December 15, 2008, and Defendants' Reply due by December 24, 2008, and good cause appearing therefore, IT IS SO ORDERED. ; and hearing continued to January 16, 2009 at 9:30 a.m. UNIT ED The Honorable Joseph C. Spero S Nove ___ r 14 Dated: _______mbe_______, 2008 S DISTRICT TE C TA ___________________________________ 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS ER N F D IS T IC T O R -3CASE NO. 3:08-cv-01951-JCS A C LI FO seph Judge Jo C. Sper o R NIA OO IT IS S RDERE D RT U O NO RT H

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?