Modavox, Inc. v. Yahoo! Inc.

Filing 81

STIPULATION AND ORDER ENLARGING TIME FOR OPPOSITION AND REPLY re 68 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Yahoo! Inc. Set/Reset Deadlines as to 68 MOTION for Summary Judgment.Opposition due by 12/1/2010. Replies due by 12/10/2010. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 11/30/10. (klh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/1/2010)

Augme Technologies, Inc. v. Yahoo! Inc.

Doc. 81

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
SHAUB & WIL L I A M S LLP 12121 WILSHIRE B L V D . STE 205 L O S A N G E L E S CA , 90025 [phone] FA X [phone] L A W FIR M @S W - L AW . C OM

David R. Shaub, Esq. (Calif. State Bar No. 032322) Lisbeth Bosshart Merrell, Esq. (Calif. State Bar No. 201822) Robert C. Matz, Esq. (Calif. State Bar No. 217822) Cassandra M. Lamb, Esq. (Calif. State Bar No. 270227) SHAUB & WILLIAMS LLP 12121 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 205 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 310-826-8042 E-mail: [e-mail] David G. Rosenbaum (Admitted pro hac vice) ROSENBAUM & SILVERT, P.C. 1480 Techny Road Northbrook, Illinois 60062 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiff Augme Technologies, Inc. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION AUGME TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, vs. YAHOO!, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant. Case No.: 3:09-CV-05386-JCS STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ENLARGING TIME FOR OPPOSITION AND REPLY TO YAHOO, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (L.R. 6.2) Honorable Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero

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

Plaintiff Augme Technologies, Inc. ("Augme") and defendant Yahoo!, Inc. ("Yahoo!") (collectively, the "Parties") through this Stipulation hereby jointly stipulate, pursuant to Local Rule 6.2, to enlarge the time for the opposition and reply to Yahoo's motion for summary judgment of non-infringement based on divided/joint infringement, subject to the terms of this Stipulation. WHEREAS, on November 12, 2010, Yahoo! filed its Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-infringement Based on Divided/Joint Infringement ("Motion for Summary Judgment");

1

STIPULATION

Dockets.Justia.com

WHEREAS, on November 22, 2010, Yahoo! filed its Administrative Motion to Extend 1 the Case Management Schedule in This Case Pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-2(D) and 7-11 2 ("Administrative Motion"); 3 WHEREAS, on November 24, 2010, Augme filed its Opposition to Yahoo!'s 4 Administrative Motion and Cross Motion to Extend the Hearing Date for Yahoo!'s Motion for 5 Summary Judgment ("Cross Motion"); 6 WHEREAS, Augme's Opposition to Yahoo's Motion for Summary Judgment is due 7 forthwith and may have to be filed before the Court rules on Augme's Cross Motion; 8 WHEREAS, previously, the parties jointly requested two one-week extensions of the 9 deadline for exchanging Prelminary Claim Constructions, and a three-week extension of the 10 deadline for filing the Joint Claim Construction and Pre-Hearing Statement; 11
SHAUB & WIL L I A M S LLP 12121 WILSHIRE B L V D . STE 205 L O S A N G E L E S CA , 90025 [phone] FA X [phone] L A W FIR M @S W - L AW . C OM

WHEREAS, this stipulation will have no effect upon the hearing date or the pending 12 Administrative Motion or Cross Motion; 13 NOW THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate, through their undersigned counsel, 14 subject to the Court's approval, that: 15 1. 16 for Summary Judgment shall be extended to December 1, 2010. 17 2. 18 Summary Judgment shall be extended to December 10, 2010. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
STIPULATION

The deadline for the filing of Augme's Opposition to Yahoo!'s Motion

The deadline for the filing of Yahoo!'s Reply in support of its Motion for

Dated: November 29, 2010 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
SHAUB & WIL L I A M S LLP 12121 WILSHIRE B L V D . STE 205 L O S A N G E L E S CA , 90025 [phone] FA X [phone] L A W FIR M @S W - L AW . C OM

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

By:

/s/ Daniel P. Muino Daniel P. Muino Attorneys for Defendant YAHOO! INC.

Dated: November 29, 2010

SHAUB & WILLIAMS LLP

By:

/s/ David R. Shaub David R. Shaub Attorneys for Plaintiff AUGME TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3
STIPULATION

[PROPOSED] ORDER PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
UNIT ED
ISTRIC ES D TC AT T

RT U O

November 30 Date: ____________________, 2010

S

JOSEPH C. SPERO E C United R N D Magistrate Judge States OF
H

IS T RIC T

A

LI

FO

Judge Jo

Spero seph C.

R NIA

NO

RT