Brandywine Communications Technologies, LLC v. Shoretel, Inc.

Filing 61

ORDER GRANTING 59 STIPULATION Private ADR. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 9/5/12. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/5/2012)

Case3:12-cv-02036-JSW Document59 Filed08/31/12 Page1 of 3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Jonathan D. Baker (Cal. Bar No. 196062)
Brent D. Rafferty (Cal Bar No. 221300)
FARNEY DANIELS LLP
800 S. Austin Ave., Suite 200
Georgetown, Texas 78626
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-Mails: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
BRANDYWINE COMMUNICATIONS

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
12

BRANDYWINE COMMUNICATIONS
TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,

13
14

Case No. 3:12-cv-02036-JSW

Plaintiff,
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

v.

15
16
17

SHORETEL, INC.,
Defendant.

18
19
20

Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the
following stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5:

21
22

The parties agree to participate in the following ADR process:

23
24
25

Private ADR: Private mediation with a mediator from JAMS or other provider.
The parties agree to hold the ADR session by February 28, 2013.

26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
SELECTING ADR PROCESS.

-1-

CASE NO: 3:12-cv-02036-JSW

Case3:12-cv-02036-JSW Document59 Filed08/31/12 Page2 of 3

1

Dated: August 31, 2012

FARNEY DANIELS, LLP

2

/s/ Jonathan D. Baker
Jonathan D. Baker

3

Counsel for Plaintiff
Brandywine Communications
Technologies, LLC

4
5
6

Dated: August 31, 2012

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

7

/s/ Christopher O. Green
Christopher O. Green

8
9

Counsel for Defendant
Avaya Inc.

10
11
12

I, Jonathan D. Baker, attest that the concurrence in the filing of this document has been
obtained from each of the other signatories.

13
14

Dated: August 31, 2012

/s/ Jonathan D. Baker
Jonathan D. Baker

15

Counsel for Plaintiff
Brandywine Communications
Technologies, LLC

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
SELECTING ADR PROCESS

-2-

CASE NO: 3:12-cv-02036-JSW

Case3:12-cv-02036-JSW Document59 Filed08/31/12 Page3 of 3

1

[PROPOSED ORDER]

2

☐

The parties’ stipulation is adopted and IT IS SO ORDERED.

3

☐

The parties’ stipulation is modified as follows, and IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5
6
7
8
9

September 5
Dated: _____________, 2012
Honorable Jeffrey S. White
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
SELECTING ADR PROCESS

-3-

CASE NO: 3:12-cv-02036-JSW