Garvey et al v. Kissmetrics et al

Filing 65

ORDER VACATING ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL BRIEFING AND RESETTING AUGUST 23, 2012 HEARING DATE TO AUGUST 17, 2012 AT 11:00 A.M.: Motion to Dismiss Hearing reset to 8/17/2012 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom C, 15th floor, San Francisco before Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler. Signed by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on 7/9/2012. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/9/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 Northern District of California 10 San Francisco Division IN RE HULU PRIVACY LITIGATION No. C 11-03764 LB 12 For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 ORDER VACATING ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL BRIEFING AND RESETTING AUGUST 23 HEARING DATE TO AUGUST 17 13 14 15 ____________________________________/ The court previously granted Hulu’s request for additional briefing after the Supreme Court’s 16 decision in Edwards. See 6/11/12 Order, ECF No. 64. Given the proceedings before the Supreme 17 Court, further briefing is not necessary. The court previously set the matter specially to 18 accommodate a briefing schedule and a hearing date during the summer. Given that no briefing is 19 needed, the court re-sets the hearing to its normal motions hearing date of Friday, August 17, 2012, 20 at 11 a.m. If that date is inconvenient for the parties because of previously-scheduled vacation or 21 case commitments, the parties may re-set it to any other available motions calendar. Those 22 calendars are generally the first and third Thursdays of each month. (The court can hear the matter 23 as early as July 19, 2012 with at least a week’s advance notice.) At the hearing, the court will hear 24 Hulu’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 9, 2012 _______________________________ LAUREL BEELER United States Magistrate Judge 27 28 ORDER (C 11-03764 LB)

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?