High Tek USA, Inc. v. Heat and Control, Inc.

Filing 66

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-2 AND ORDER re 65 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 10/18/2013. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/18/2013)

1
2
3
4
5

ROBERT S. SHWARTS (STATE BAR NO. 196803)
[e-mail]
RUSSELL P. COHEN (STATE BAR NO. 213105)
[e-mail]
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
The Orrick Building
405 Howard Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2669
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

6
7

Attorneys for Defendant
HEAT AND CONTROL, INC.

8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
11
12
13

HIGH TEK USA, INC., a California
corporation,

14
15
16

Plaintiff,

Case No. 3:12-cv-805-WHO
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER
CHANGING TIME PURSUANT TO
LOCAL RULE 6-2 AND ORDER

v.
HEAT AND CONTROL, INC., a California
corporation, and DOES 1-10, inclusive,

17
Defendants.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME AND
ORDER – CASE NO. 3:12-CV-805-WHO

1

Pursuant to Northern District of California Local Rule 6-2, plaintiff High Tek USA, Inc.

2

(“High Tek”) and defendant Heat and Control, Inc. (“Heat and Control”) jointly submit this

3

Stipulated Request for Changing Time and hereby stipulate as follows:

4
5

WHEREAS, on April 9, 2013, the Court entered the Scheduling Order setting the last day
for fact discovery as October 11, 2013. [Docket No. 57]

6
7

WHEREAS, pursuant to Local Rule 37-3, the deadline to file a motion to compel further
fact discovery is Friday, October 18.

8

WHEREAS, on October 1, 2013, Heat and Control took the deposition of High Tek

9

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6). High Tek’s deponent was unable to answer

10

certain questions during that deposition on topics for which the deposition had been noticed.
WHEREAS, on October 15, Heat and Control and High Tek’s counsel met and conferred

11
12

via telephone regarding Heat and Control’s request that High Tek produce a witness prepared to

13

fully answer questions falling under Topics Nos. 12, 13 and 14 of the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition

14

notice directed to High Tek.

15
16

WHEREAS, High Tek proposed that in lieu of a further deposition it provide written
answers to the questions at issue.

17

WHEREAS, Heat and Control agrees to the proposal, subject to the right to bring a

18

motion to compel after the deadline set by Local Rule 37-3 if it determines that High Tek’s

19

written responses are insufficient.

20

WHEREAS, the parties believe that extending the motion to compel deadline for this

21

issue may allow them to resolve or narrow issues relating to High Tek’s responses to the

22

deposition topics.

23
24

WHEREAS, the proposed modification to the motion to compel deadline will not impact
any other date or deadline set by the Scheduling Order or by Local Rule.

25

WHEREAS, this is the first time that the parties have sought to continue dates in this

26

matter.

27

//////

28

//////
-1-

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME AND
ORDER – CASE NO. 3:12-CV-805-WHO

1
2

IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED and AGREED, and the parties ask the Court to adopt
as its order the following:

3

STIPULATION
1. High Tek shall provide supplemental responses to Heat and Control’s Special

4
5

Interrogatories Nos. 1-9, such responses to provide information responding to the questions posed

6

during the October 1 deposition of High Tek for which High Tek’s deponent was unable to

7

answer.

8
9
10
11
12
13

2. High Tek shall serve such supplemental discovery responses upon Heat and
Control on or before October 23, 2013.
3. Heat and Control’s deadline for bringing a motion to compel further responses to
Topics 12, 13 and 14 of the deposition notice of High Tek shall be continued to November 1.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: October 17, 2013

14
15

By: /s/ Russell P. Cohen
RUSSELL P. COHEN
Attorneys for Defendant
HEAT AND CONTROL, INC.

16
17
18

ROBERT S. SHWARTS
RUSSELL P. COHEN
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

Dated: October 17, 2013

19

JENNIFER RANDLETT MADDEN
ANTHONY L. VIGNOLO
CAROLINE M. COLANGELO
Downey Brand LLP

20
By: /s/ Anthony L. Vignolo
Anthony L. Vignolo
Attorneys for Plaintiff
HIGH TEK USA, INC.

21
22
23
24

I, Russell Cohen, am the ECF User whose User ID and password are being used to file

25

this Stipulation. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that the above-listed

26

signatories have concurred in this filing.
/s/ Russell P. Cohen

27
28
-2-

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME AND
ORDER – CASE NO. 3:12-CV-805-WHO

1

ORDER

2
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
4
5

Dated: October 18, 2013

________________________________
William H. Orrick
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME AND
ORDER – CASE NO. 3:12-CV-805-WHO