Oracle Corporation et al v. Druglogic, Inc.
Filing
208
ORDER GRANTING re 207 Stipulation To Shorten Time for the Court to Consider Druglogic's, 204 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery Druglogic, Inc.'s Motion to Extend Discovery Period for Limited Purpose. Responses due by 4/10/2013. Replies due by 4/12/2013. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 4/8/13. (klhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/8/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Martin L. Fineman (California State Bar No. 104413)
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
505 Montgomery St., Suite 800
San Francisco, California 94111-6533
Phone: (415) 276-6500
Fax: (415) 276-6599
E-mail: martinfineman@dwt.com
Peter Davis (admitted pro hac vice)
Steven E. Tiller (admitted pro hac vice)
Erin O. Millar (admitted pro hac vice)
Gregory Stone (admitted pro hac vice)
WHITEFORD TAYLOR & PRESTON, LLP
7 St. Paul Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202-1636
Phone: (410) 347-8700
Fax: (410) 223-4304
Email: pdavis@wtplaw.com
Email: stiller@wtplaw.com
Email: emillar@wtplaw.com
Email: gstone@wtplaw.com
Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-Claimant
DRUGLOGIC, INC.
13
14
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
ORACLE CORPORATION et al.,
Case No. C 11-00910 JCS
16
17
18
Plaintiffs,
v.
DRUGLOGIC, INC.,
Defendant.
19
20
21
22
THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO
SHORTEN TIME FOR THE COURT
TO CONSIDER DRUGLOGIC’S
MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY
FOR LIMITED PURPOSE
DRUGLOGIC, INC.,
Counterclaimant,
v.
ORACLE CORPORATION et al.
Counterclaim Defendants.
23
24
25
26
THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR THE COURT TO CONSIDER
DRUGLOGIC’S MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY FOR LIMITED PURPOSE
CASE NO. 11-CV-00910 JCS
DWT 21617657v1 0093218-000001
1
STIPULATION
2
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Parties, Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff DrugLogic, Inc.
3
(“DrugLogic”) and Plaintiffs/Counterclaim Defendants Oracle Corporation, Oracle International
4
Corporation, and Oracle America Inc. (collectively, “Oracle”) hereby stipulate to an order shortening the
5
time for the Court to consider DrugLogic’s Motion to Extend Discovery for a Limited Purpose filed on
6
April 5, 2010 (“Motion”). In this regard, the Parties respectfully request that the Court hear the Motion
7
according to the following schedule:
8
•
April 10, 2013 – Oracle’s Opposition to DrugLogic’s motion
9
•
April 12, 2013 – DrugLogic’s Reply in support of its motion
10
•
Hearing to be scheduled at the Court’s discretion, if necessary.
11
Respectfully submitted,
12
/s/ Erin O. Millar
Martin L. Fineman (California State Bar No. 104413)
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
505 Montgomery St., Suite 800
San Francisco, California 94111-6533
Phone: (415) 276-6500
Fax: (415) 276-6599
E-mail: martinfineman@dwt.com
13
14
15
16
Peter Davis (admitted pro hac vice)
Steven E. Tiller (admitted pro hac vice)
Erin O. Millar (admitted pro hac vice)
Gregory M. Stone (admitted pro hac vice)
WHITEFORD TAYLOR & PRESTON, LLP
7 St. Paul Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202-1636
Phone: (410) 347-8700
Fax: (410) 223-4304
Email: pdavis@wtplaw.com
Email: stiller@wtplaw.com
Email: emillar@wtplaw.com
Email: gstone@wtplaw.com
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-Claimant
24
25
26
THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR THE COURT TO CONSIDER
DRUGLOGIC’S MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY FOR LIMITED PURPOSE
CASE NO. 11-CV-00910 JCS
DWT 21617657v1 0093218-000001
-2-
1
DRUGLOGIC, INC.
2
/s/ Christina Von de Ahe
Karen Johnson-McKewan
kjohnson-mckewan@orick.com
Christina Von Der Ahe
cvonderahe@orrick.com
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE, LLP
The Orrick Building
405 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-2669
3
4
5
6
7
I. Neel Chatterjee
nchatterjee@orrick.com
Michael C. Spillner
mspillner@orrick.com
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE, LLP
1000 Marsh Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025
8
9
10
11
Deborah K. Miller (California State Bar. No. 95527)
deborah.miller@oracle.com
Peggy E. Bruggman (California State Bar No. 184176)
peggy.bruggman@oracle.com
Lesley E. Kothe (California State Bar No. 209512)
lesley.kothe@oracle.com
ORACLE CORPORATION
500 Oracle Parkway
Redwood City, California 94065
12
13
14
15
16
S
RT
ER
21
R NIA
seph C.
Spero
A
H
20
Judge Jo
FO
NO
19
ERED
O ORD
IT IS S
LI
Dated: April 8, 2013
UNIT
ED
18
RT
U
O
17
ISTRIC
ES D
TC
AT
T
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
22
23
24
25
26
THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR THE COURT TO CONSIDER
DRUGLOGIC’S MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY FOR LIMITED PURPOSE
CASE NO. 11-CV-00910 JCS
DWT 21617657v1 0093218-000001
-3-
1
2
3
4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that on April 5, 2013 the foregoing
STIPULATION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR THE COURT TO CONSIDER DRUGLOGIC’S
MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY FOR LIMITED PURPOSE
was served on the following persons via first-class mail, postage prepaid and email:
5
Karen Johnson-McKewan
kjohnson-mckewan@orick.com
Christina Von Der Ahe
cvonderahe@orrick.com
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE, LLP
The Orrick Building
405 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-2669
6
7
8
9
I. Neel Chatterjee
nchatterjee@orrick.com
Michael C. Spillner
mspillner@orrick.com
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE, LLP
1000 Marsh Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025
10
11
12
13
Deborah K. Miller (California State Bar. No. 95527)
deborah.miller@oracle.com
Peggy E. Bruggman (California State Bar No. 184176)
peggy.bruggman@oracle.com
Lesley E. Kothe (California State Bar No. 209512)
lesley.kothe@oracle.com
ORACLE CORPORATION
500 Oracle Parkway
Redwood City, California 94065
14
15
16
17
18
Attorneys for Oracle Corporation, Oracle
International Corporation, and Phase Forward,
19
20
I certify that all parties in this case are represented by counsel who are CM/ECF participants.
21
/s/ Erin O. Millar
Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant, DRUGLOGIC,
INC.
22
23
24
25
26
THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR THE COURT TO CONSIDER
DRUGLOGIC’S MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY FOR LIMITED PURPOSE
CASE NO. 11-CV-00910 JCS
DWT 21617657v1 0093218-000001
-4-
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?