Zyme Solutions, Inc. v. Infonow Corporation, dba Channelinsight

Filing 49

ORDER CHANGING TIME FOR INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS AND SUBSEQUENT DEADLINES by Hon. William Alsup granting 47 Stipulation; referring to 39 Case Management Order(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/18/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Jonathan Allan Klein (California Bar No. 162071) Kelly, Hockel & Klein P.C. 1 Sansome Street, Suite 1800 San Francisco, CA 94104 Tel. (415) 951-0535 Fax (415) 391-7808 jaklein@khklaw.com Andrew R. Shoemaker (appearing pro hac vice) Shoemaker Ghiselli + Schwartz 1811 Pearl Street Boulder, CO 80302 Tel. (303) 530-3452 Fax (303) 530-4071 ashoemaker@sgslitigation.com 10 11 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT InfoNow Corporation, d/b/a Channelinsight 12 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 16 ZYME SOLUTIONS, INC., 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Plaintiff, vs. INFONOW CORPORATION, d/b/a CHANNELINSIGHT, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case Number: C 3:13-cv-04082-WHA STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME AND DECLARATION IN SUPPORT THEREOF 25 26 27 28 Page 1 of 4 STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME AND DECLARATION IN SUPPORT THEREOF 3:13-CV-04082-WHA 1 Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Zyme Solutions, Inc. (“Zyme”) and Defendant and 2 Counterclaim Plaintiff, InfoNow Corporation, d/b/a Channelinsight (“Channelinsight”) hereby 3 file this stipulated request for an order extending certain time frames set in the Patent Local 4 5 Rules, and the following declaration in support thereof, as required pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(a). Among other reasons to seek this extension, lead counsel for Channelinsight will be 6 7 traveling outside the country at the end of February and beginning of March, when Zyme’s 8 disclosures under Patent L.R. 3-3 and 3-4 are due and when deadlines under Patent L.R. 4 begin 9 to arise. To ensure that the parties have adequate time to comply with Patent L.R. 4-1 and 4-2, 10 11 the parties jointly request a modest extension of the deadline under Patent L.R. 3-3 and 3-4 and all subsequent deadlines timed therefrom. More specifically, the parties request that the deadline 12 13 for Zyme to serve its Invalidity Contentions (Patent L.R. 3-3) and Document Production 14 Accompanying Invalidity Contentions (Patent L.R. 3-4) be extended from February 24, 2014 to 15 March 10, 2014 and deadlines timed therefrom pursuant to the Patent Local Rules be extended 16 17 accordingly. No party will be prejudiced because the Case Management Order entered by the Court on December 24, 2013, provides that claim construction in this case will occur during 18 19 summary judgment or at trial in setting the jury instructions. 20 There have been no previous time modifications in this matter, nor will the enlargement 21 of time described above affect the deadlines contained in the Court’s Case Management Order, 22 23 dated December 23, 2013. Therefore, the parties request that the Court grant this Stipulated Request for Order Changing Time, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(b). 24 25 26 27 28 Page 2 of 4 STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME AND DECLARATION IN SUPPORT THEREOF 3:13-CV-04082-WHA 1 Dated: February 13, 2014 KUTAK ROCK LLP s/ Chad T. Nitta Jacob Song Chad T. Nitta (appearance pro hac vice) Blair E. Kanis (appearance pro hac vice) 2 3 4 5 Counsel for Plaintiff Zyme Solutions, Inc. 6 7 8 9 10 Dated: February 13, 2014 SHOEMAKER GHISELLI + SCHWARTZ s/ Andrew R. Shoemaker Jonathan Allan Klein Andrew R. Shoemaker (appearance pro hac vice) 11 12 13 14 15 16 Counsel for Defendant InfoNow Corporation, d/b/a Channelinsight All deadlines ordered in the Case Management Order remain in place (Dkt. No. 39). PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 18, 2014. ________________________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT/MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 3 of 4 STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME AND DECLARATION IN SUPPORT THEREOF 3:13-CV-04082-WHA

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?