Kilopass Technology, Inc. v. Sidense Corporation

Filing 383

***ORDER by Judge Susan Illston granting 377 Motion to Stay, signed on 4/15/13 (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/16/2013)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 4 5 6 7 8 9 KILOPASS TECHNOLOGY, INC., a California Corporation, Case No. 3:10-cv-02066 SI [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING Plaintiff, PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 62(d) TO STAY ENFORCEMENT OF TAXABLE COSTS AND v. SIDENSE CORP., a Canadian Corporation, BOND Defendant. 10 11 12 13 Pro. 62(d), to stay execution of the taxation of costs entered on March 6, 2013 (Dkt. No. 376) 14 supersedeas 15 16 17 bond amount of $66,076.77. IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 19 4/15 Dated: ______________________, 2013 20 By: ______________________________ Hon. Susan Illston United States District Court Judge 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. 3:10-CV-02066 SI 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I, Jocasta Wong, hereby declare: 3 I am employed in the City and County of Palo Alto, California in the office of a member of 4 the bar of this court whose direction the following service was made. I am over the age of eighteen 5 years and not a party to the within action. My business address is SNR Denton US LLP, 1530 Page 6 Mill Road, Suite 200, Palo Alto, California 94304. 7 On March 15, 2013, the following documents, described as: 8 [PROPOSED] ORD MOTION PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 62(d) TO STAY ENFORCEMENT OF TAXABLE COSTS AND APPROVAL OF 9 10 11 to be served via CM/ECF by the Clerk of the Court, upon all counsel of record registered to receive 12 13 14 15 not registered for electronic filing. I declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct. Executed on March 15, 2013, in Palo Alto, California. 16 /s/ Jocasta Wong Jocasta Wong 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. 3:10-CV-02066 SI

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?