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)

Download PDF
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?