Modavox, Inc. v. Yahoo! Inc.

Filing 26

ORDER continuing CMC re 25 Stipulation filed by Yahoo! Inc. Initial Case Management Conference set for 3/19/2010 08:30 AM.. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 2/16/2010. (be, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/16/2010)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 RACHEL KREVANS (CA SBN 116421) (rkrevans@mofo.com) RICHARD S.J. HUNG (CA SBN 197425) (rhung@mofo.com) JIAN BIN (BEN) GAO (CA SBN 245734) (jgao@mofo.com) MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415.268.7000 Facsimile: 415.268.7522 Attorneys for Defendant YAHOO! INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 12 13 Case No. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE sf-2800454 C-09-5386 CRB MODAVOX, INC., Plaintiff, v. YAHOO! INC., Defendant. Filed: November 16, 2009 Trial: No Date Set STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 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 2010; Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1(b), 7-12 and 16-2(e), the parties, by and through their counsel, respectfully request that the Court grant, in the form of an Order, the parties' stipulated request to continue the initial case management conference. In support of this stipulated request, the parties state as follows: WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed the Complaint on November 16, 2009; WHEREAS, on January 28, 2010, the Court entered an Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference ("Scheduling Order"); WHEREAS, the Scheduling Order set an initial case management conference for March 5, WHEREAS, the Parties filed their respective ADR Certifications and Stipulation Selecting ADR Process on February 2, 2010; WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint on February 4, 2010; WHEREAS, in light of the recently filed Amended Complaint, and due to scheduling conflicts, counsel request the Court's permission to continue the March 5, 2010 initial case management conference for two weeks until March 19, 2010. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE sf-2800454 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate and respectfully request the Court enter an Order as follows: 1. 2. The Initial Case Management Conference currently scheduled for March 5, 2010 is hereby continued to March 19, 2010; and The joint case management statement shall be due on March 12, 2010. Dated: February 9, 2010 SHAUB WILLIAMS LLP By: ___Stephen D. Morgan _________ David R. Shaub Lisbeth Bosshart-Merrill Stephen D. Morgan 12121 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 205 Los Angeles, CA 90025-1165 Telephone: (310) 826-6678 Facsimile: (310) 826-8042 lawfirm@sw-law.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Modavox, Inc. MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP By: ___Richard S.J. Hung________ Rachel Krevans Richard S.J. Hung Jian Bin (Ben) Gao 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 rkrevans@mofo.com rhung@mofo.com jgao@mofo.com Attorneys for Defendant Yahoo! Inc. ATTESTATION OF E-FILED SIGNATURE I, Richard S.J. Hung, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that each signatory to this document has concurred to its filing. Dated: February 9, 2010 By: /s/ Richard S.J. Hung Richard S.J. Hung UNIT ED S 25 26 27 28 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. ISTRIC ES D TC AT T STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ER C sf-2800454 N F D IS T IC T O R A LI FO Ju R NIA February 16 Dated: _____________________, 2010 ____________________________________ The Honorable Charles R. Breyer eyer rles Judge United States eDistrictR. Br dg Cha NO O IT IS S ORDER ED RT U O 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?