J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. v. Eolas Technologies Inc. et al

Filing 34

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on March 14, 2014. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/14/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6

COURTLAND L. REICHMAN (SBN: 268873)
[e-mail]
MCKOOL SMITH HENNIGAN, P.C.
255 Shoreline Drive, Suite 510
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED;
and THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA

SASHA G. RAO (SBN: 244303)
[e-mail]
BRANDON H. STROY (SBN: 289090)
[e-mail]
BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP
1117 S. California Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1106
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
J.C. PENNEY CORPORATION, INC.

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11

McKool Smith Hennigan, P.C.
225 Shoreline Drive, Suite 510
Redwood Shores, CA 94065

12
13
14
15
16
17

)
)
)
)
)
EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES
INCORPORATED; and THE REGENTS OF )
)
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
J.C. PENNEY CORPORATION, INC.,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. 3:13-cv-06003-MMC
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR
DEFENDANTS TO REPLY TO
PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION (D.I. 27)

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER
McKool 973701v1

1

CASE NO. 3:13-CV-06003-MMC

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiff J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. (“JCP”)

2

and Defendants Eolas Technologies Incorporated and The Regents of the University of California

3
4

(collectively, “Defendants”) hereby stipulate through their respective counsel of record as follows:
WHEREAS, on January 7, 2014 and January 6, 2014, JCP served its complaint upon

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Defendants;
WHEREAS, on January 23, 2014, at the request of Defendants, the parties agreed to mutual
14 day extensions for Defendants to respond to JCP’s complaint;
WHEREAS, on January 23, 2014, this Court granted the parties stipulation;
WHEREAS, on February 7, 2014, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of
jurisdiction in response to JCP’s complaint;

12
McKool Smith Hennigan, P.C.
225 Shoreline Drive, Suite 510
Redwood Shores, CA 94065

WHEREAS, on February 14, 2014, the parties filed a joint stipulation to extend deadlines
13
14

for: 1) JCP to respond to Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction to March 7, 2014;

15

and 2) Defendants to reply to JCP’s opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of

16

jurisdiction to March 14, 2014;

17
18
19

WHEREAS, on February 18, 2014, this Court granted the parties stipulation and set
Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction for hearing on March 28, 2014;
WHEREAS, on February 19, 2014, the parties filed a joint stipulation requesting the hearing

20
on Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction be noticed on or after April 4, 2014, or as
21
22
23
24
25
26

soon thereafter at the Court’s convenience;
WHEREAS, on February 19, 2014, this Court rescheduled the hearing on Defendants’
motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction for April 4, 2014 at 9:00 a.m.; and
WHEREAS, on March 7, 2014, JCP filed its opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss for
lack of jurisdiction.

27
28

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER
McKool 973701v1

2

CASE NO. 3:13-CV-06003-MMC

1

NOW THEREFORE the parties, through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and

2

request that the Court grant, pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2, that the time for Defendants to reply to JCP’s

3
4

opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction be extended by three days to
March 17, 2014.

5
6
7

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated this March 13, 2014.

8

By: /s/ Courtland L. Reichman
COURTLAND LEWIS REICHMAN
(SBN 268873)
[e-mail]
255 Shoreline Drive, Suite 510
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

9
10
11
12
McKool Smith Hennigan, P.C.
225 Shoreline Drive, Suite 510
Redwood Shores, CA 94065

MCKOOL SMITH HENNIGAN, P.C.

Attorneys for Defendants EOLAS
TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED; and THE
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA

13
14
15
16

Dated this March 13, 2014.

17

BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP
By: /s/ Sasha G. Rao
SASHA G. RAO (SBN: 244303)
[e-mail]
1117 S. California Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1106
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

18
19
20
21

Attorneys for Plaintiff
J.C. PENNEY CORPORATION, INC.

22
23
24

I hereby attest pursuant to L.R. 5.1(i)(3) that concurrence in the electronic filing of this
document has been obtained from the other signatories.

25
26

Dated this March 13, 2014.

/s/ Courtland L. Reichman
Courtland L. Reichman

27
28

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER
McKool 973701v1

3

CASE NO. 3:13-CV-06003-MMC

[PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2

The Court having considered the stipulation of the parties, orders that the time for

3

Defendants to reply to JCP’s opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is

4

extended by three days to until March 17, 2014.

5
PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
7
8

Dated: ________________, 2014
March 14

9

______________________________
Honorable Maxine M. Chesney
United States District Judge

10
11

McKool Smith Hennigan, P.C.
225 Shoreline Drive, Suite 510
Redwood Shores, CA 94065

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER
McKool 973701v1

4

CASE NO. 3:13-CV-06003-MMC