PNY Technologies, Inc. v. Sandisk Corporation

Filing 204

ORDER re 203 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Modifying Pretrial Schedule. The Court will hold a Case Management Conference after the hearing on SanDisks Motion to Dismiss PNYs Second Amended Complaint to modify the case management schedule. Case Management Conference set for 4/9/2014 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 03/19/2014. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/19/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

DANIEL B. ASIMOW (No. 165661)
[e-mail]
ROBERT D. HALLMAN (No. 239949)
[e-mail]
ARNOLD & PORTER LLP
Three Embarcadero Center, 7th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-4024
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
415.471.3400
IRA GOTTLIEB (admitted pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
RICHARD HERNANDEZ (admitted pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
JONATHAN SHORT (admitted pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
McCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP
Four Gateway Center
100 Mulberry Street
Newark, New Jersey 07102
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 973.624.7070
Attorneys for Plaintiff
PNY TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

ALLEN J. RUBY (SB No. 47109)
[e-mail]
DAVID W. HANSEN (SB No. 196958)
[e-mail]
JAMES P. SCHAEFER (SB No. 250417)
[e-mail]
SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER &
FLOM LLP
525 University Avenue, Suite 1100
Palo Alto, California 94301
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
JAMES A. KEYTE (admitted pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER &
FLOM LLP
Four Times Square
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant,
SANDISK CORPORATION

15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
PNY TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

Case No.: C-11-04689 WHO

18
Plaintiff,
19

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER
MODIFYING PRETRIAL SCHEDULE

vs.
20
SANDISK CORPORATION,
21
Defendant.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIP. REQ. FOR ORDER MODIFYING PRETRIAL SCHEDULE

11-4689-WHO

1

Pursuant to Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiff PNY Technologies, Inc. (“PNY”), and

2

Defendant SanDisk Corporation (“SanDisk”), by and through their respective counsel of record,

3

hereby stipulate to and respectfully request that the Court enter an order extending certain case

4

management deadlines.

5

The primary basis for this request is that the parties recently completed a trial in their state

6

court matter in Santa Clara County (SanDisk Corporation v. PNY Technologies, Inc., Superior

7

Court of California, County of Santa Clara, Case No. 1:11-cv-205928). Trial proceedings began on

8

January 28, 2014 and the jury returned its verdict on March 10, 2014. The state court trial took

9

longer than the parties expected and disrupted the parties’ ability to complete discovery in

10

accordance with the prior case management order. In addition, post-trial proceedings are likely to

11

consume additional time over the next several weeks.

12

In addition, SanDisk’s Motion to Dismiss PNY’s Second Amended Complaint is scheduled

13

to be heard on April 9, 2014, and the Court’s ruling on this motion may affect discovery in this

14

case.
Accordingly, the parties propose the following changes to the Court’s November 19, 2013

15
16

case management order:

17

Event

Current Date

Proposed Modified Date

18

Discovery cutoff:

April 18, 2014

June 24, 2014

19

Expert disclosure:

May 23, 2014

July 31, 2014

20

Expert rebuttal:

June 20, 2014

September 1, 2014

21

Expert discovery cutoff:

July 18, 2014

September 24, 2014

22

Motions heard by:

October 8, 2014

November 12, 2014

23
24

Prior time modifications in this case consist of (a) the November 3, 2011 Stipulation and

25

Order providing SanDisk with additional time to respond to PNY’s complaint, so that SanDisk’s

26

response was due on November 9, 2011, (b) the November 16, 2011 Stipulation and Order setting

27

an extended briefing schedule and hearing date on SanDisk’s motion to dismiss PNY’s original

28

-1STIP. REQ. FOR ORDER MODIFYING PRETRIAL SCHEDULE

11-4689-WHO

1

complaint, and (c) the May 16, 2012 Order extending the time for PNY to file its First Amended

2

Complaint, (d) the July 19, 2012 Order modifying the briefing schedule with respect to SanDisk’s

3

Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint, and (e) the Court’s November 19, 2013 Order

4

modifying the pretrial schedule.

5
6
7

DATED: March 18, 2014

ARNOLD & PORTER LLP

8
By:

9
10

/s/ Daniel B. Asimow
DANIEL B. ASIMOW
Attorneys for Plaintiff
PNY TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

11
12
13

DATED: March 18, 2014

SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP

14
15
16
17

By:

/s/ James P. Schaefer
JAMES P. SCHAEFER
Attorneys for Defendant
SANDISK CORPORATION

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2STIP. REQ. FOR ORDER MODIFYING PRETRIAL SCHEDULE

11-4689-WHO

ORDER

1
2

The Court will hold a Case Management Conference after the hearing on SanDisk’s Motion

3

to Dismiss PNY’s Second Amended Complaint on April 9, 2014 to modify the case management

4

schedule. It is not necessary to file a Joint Case Management Statement unless there are additional

5

issues the parties would like to bring to the Court’s attention. In light of the verdict in the Superior

6

Court of California, County of Santa Clara, I would agree to adjust the schedule as requested by the

7

parties. However, before setting new dates, I would like to talk with the parties about (i) the effect

8

on the schedule, if any, that my ruling on the motion will have, (ii) what impact the verdict has on

9

the mediation or other resolution of the case, and (iii) the need to set a new trial date to

10

accommodate the revised case management schedule. If the proposed schedule becomes the final

11

schedule, I would continue the trial until February 17, 2015, assuming that date is convenient to

12

counsel, to allow three months from the last day to hear dispositive motions until the trial.

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15
16

March 19, 2014

________________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-3STIP. REQ. FOR ORDER MODIFYING PRETRIAL SCHEDULE

11-4689-WHO