Masterobjects, Inc. v. Amazon.Com, Inc.
Filing
29
ORDER rescheduling CMC re 27 Stipulation filed by Amazon.Com, Inc. Initial Case Management Conference set for 8/12/2011 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 6/10/2011. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/10/2011)
Case3:11-cv-01055-CRB Document27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
I. NEEL CHATTERJEE (STATE BAR NO. 173985)
nchatterjee@orrick.com
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
1000 Marsh Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Telephone:
+1-650-614-7400
Facsimile:
+1-650-614-7401
JEFFREY L. COX (admitted Pro Hac Vice)
jcox@orrick.com
RANJIT NARAYANAN (admitted Pro Hac Vice)
rnarayanan@orrick.com
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5700
Seattle, WA 98401
Telephone:
+1-206-839-4300
Facsimile:
+1-206-839-4301
Attorneys for Defendant AMAZON.COM, INC.
DIANE SUE RICE
drice@hosielaw.com
SPENCER HOSIE
shosie@hosielaw.com
GEORGE F. BISHOP
gbishop@hosielaw.com
WILLIAM PATRICK NELSON
wnelson@hosielaw.com
HOSIE RICE LLP
Transamerica Pyramid
600 Montgomery Street
34th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
415-247-6000
Facsimile:
415-247-6001
Attorneys for MASTEROBJECTS, INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
21
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
22
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
23
24
MASTEROBJECTS, INC.,
Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,
25
26
27
28
ORRICK, HERRINGTON &
SUTCLIFFE LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SILICON VALLEY
Filed06/08/11 Page1 of 5
v.
AMAZON.COM, INC.,
Defendant/Counter-Claimant.
Case No. CV 11-01055 CRB
STIPULATED REQUEST TO
RESCHEDULE CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER RESCHEDULING CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
RESCHEDULING CMC
CASE NO. CV11-01055 CRB
Case3:11-cv-01055-CRB Document27
Filed06/08/11 Page2 of 5
1
2
1.
WHEREAS, other pending cases in this District, including MasterObjects v.
3
Google, Inc., Case No. CV 11-01054 PJH (“the Google case”), involve the same patent at issue in
4
the instant case and were brought by the same plaintiff, MasterObjects, Inc. (“MasterObjects), as
5
in the instant case.
6
2.
WHEREAS on June 3, 2010, pursuant to Civil Local Rules 3-12 and 7-11,
7
Amazon.com, Inc. (“Amazon”) filed an Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases
8
Should Be Related (“Amazon’s Motion To Relate”), seeking to relate the instant case to the
9
Google case. (Case No. CV 11-01054 PJH, Dkt. Nos. 15-17).
10
11
3.
WHEREAS United States District Judge Hamilton, presiding in the Google case,
has not yet ruled on Amazon’s Motion To Relate.
12
4.
WHEREAS, on June 6, 2011, the Court Staff issued a Notice of Electronic Filing
13
or Other Case Activity in the Google case, stating “Deadlines terminated.” (Case No. CV 11-
14
01054 PJH, Docket text dated 6/6/2011).
15
5.
WHEREAS, to avoid the burden – both on the Court and the parties – of preparing
16
for and participating in a Case Management Conference in the instant case that may be rendered
17
superfluous by Judge Hamilton’s ruling, the parties respectfully request that the Case
18
Management Conference be rescheduled for July 8, 2011, or another date specified by the Court.
19
20
21
6.
WHEREAS the following changes have previously been made to deadlines in this
case:
Deadlines in the case were terminated on March 3, 2011, after the parties declined
22
to proceed before a U.S. Magistrate Judge and requested reassignment to a United
23
States District Judge. (Docket text dated 3/3/2011).
24
An Extension of Time to Answer was granted on March 31, 2011. (Dkt. No. 10).
25
26
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the
27
parties appearing below through their undersigned respective attorneys of record, based on the
28
foregoing, and subject to the approval of this Court, that:
ORRICK, HERRINGTON &
SUTCLIFFE LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SILICON VALLEY
-1-
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
RESCHEDULING CMC
CASE NO. CV11-01055 CRB
Case3:11-cv-01055-CRB Document27
1
2
3
4
a.
Filed06/08/11 Page3 of 5
Rescheduling the Case Management Conference to July 8, 2011 will have no
appreciable effect on the schedule for the case.
b.
The Case Management Conference in this case, currently scheduled for June 17,
8:30 a.m.
2011, be rescheduled to ________________, 2011, at _________.
August 12
5
6
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
15
ER
R NIA
FO
J
H
14
RT
13
. Breyer
arles R
udge Ch
NO
12
I
LI
11
_____________________________________
Honorable Charles R. Breyer ERED
D
United States District O OR
T IS S Judge
UNIT
ED
10
DATED: _________________
August 10, 2011
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
RT
U
O
9
S
8
A
7
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORRICK, HERRINGTON &
SUTCLIFFE LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SILICON VALLEY
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
RESCHEDULING CMC
CASE NO. CV11-01055 CRB
Case3:11-cv-01055-CRB Document27
1
2
3
Submitted by:
Dated: June 8, 2011
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
Attorneys for AMAZON.COM, INC.
13
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
/s/ I. Neel Chatterjee /s/
JEFFREY L. COX (admitted Pro Hac Vice)
jcox@orrick.com
RANJIT NARAYANAN (admitted Pro Hac Vice)
rnarayanan@orrick.com
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5700
Seattle, WA 98401
Telephone:
+1-206-839-4300
Facsimile:
+1-206-839-4301
8
15
By:
I. NEEL CHATTERJEE (STATE BAR NO. 173985)
nchatterjee@orrick.com
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
1000 Marsh Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Telephone:
+1-650-614-7400
Facsimile:
+1-650-614-7401
4
14
Filed06/08/11 Page4 of 5
Dated: June 8, 2011
By:
/s/ Spencer Hosie /s/
DIANE SUE RICE
drice@hosielaw.com
SPENCER HOSIE
shosie@hosielaw.com
GEORGE F. BISHOP
gbishop@hosielaw.com
WILLIAM PATRICK NELSON
wnelson@hosielaw.com
HOSIE RICE LLP
Transamerica Pyramid
600 Montgomery Street
34th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
415-247-6000
Facsimile:
415-247-6001
Attorneys for MASTEROBJECTS, INC.
24
25
26
27
28
ORRICK, HERRINGTON &
SUTCLIFFE LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SILICON VALLEY
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
RESCHEDULING CMC
CASE NO. CV11-01055 CRB
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?