Segan LLC v. Zynga Inc.
Filing
155
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 154 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER for Scheduling of Settlement Conference filed by Segan LLC. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 2/18/15. (sisS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/18/2015)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
BLANK ROME LLP
Naki Margolis, Esq. (SBN 94120)
Nmargolis@Blankrome.com
601 Montgomery Street, Suite 2030
San Francisco, CA 94111
Phone: 415.986.2144
Facsimile: 415.986.4461
Victor M. Wigman, Esq.
Charles R. Wolfe, Jr. Esq.
Brian Wm. Higgins, Esq.
Nicholas M. Nyemah, Esq. (SBN 274550)
600 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20037
Phone: 202.772.5800
David A. Dorey, Esq.
1201 Market Street, Suite 800
Wilmington, DE 19801
Phone: 302.425.6400
11
12
13
14
15
16
Attorneys for PLAINTIFF,
SEGAN LLC
DURIE TANGRI LLP
Sonali D. Maitra (SBN 254896)
Sarah E. Stahnke (SBN 264838)
217 Leidesdorff Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: 415.362.6666
Facsimile: 415.236.6300
17
18
Attorneys for DEFENDANT
ZYNGA, INC.
19
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
20
21
22
24
25
Case No. 3:14-cv-01315-VC
SEGAN LLC,
23
Paintiff,
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER FOR SCHEDULING OF
SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
v.
ZYNGA, INC.
26
Defendant.
Judge: Honorable Kandis A. Westmore
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR SCHEDULING OF SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
136789.00101/36432891v.1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
By Settlement Conference Order dated October 10, 2014, United States Magistrate
Judge Kandis A. Westmore scheduled a second, follow-up settlement conference in this
matter (after holding an initial conference on October 10, 2014) for December 19, 2014.
(Dkt. No. 82). On December 11, 2014, this Court granted the parties’ stipulated request to
postpone the December 19 settlement conference, and ordered the parties to contact Judge
Westmore’s Chambers no later than 60 days after the close of fact discovery (i.e., by
February 16, 2015) to identify a future date to reschedule the settlement conference. (Dkt.
No. 115).
Presently, the parties are in the process of briefing claim construction and a motion
for summary judgment, and those matters are scheduled for oral argument before Judge
Chhabria on April 1, 2015. The parties believe that Judge Chhabria’s ruling concerning
claim construction and summary judgment may resolve significant disagreements between
the parties concerning material elements of the case. Under the circumstances, and
pursuant to Dkt. No. 115, the parties agree and jointly propose the following, subject to
Court approval:
1. The settlement conference will remain adjourned until Judge Chhabria issues a
ruling on claim construction and summary judgment, following the April 1
argument.
2. The parties will confer and contact Judge Westmore’s chambers about the
continuation of settlement discussions no later than thirty (30) days after Judge
Chhabria issues a ruling on claim construction and summary judgment.
22
23
IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR SCHEDULING OF SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
136789.00101/36432891v.1
2
1
DATED: February 13, 2015
/s/ Nicholas M. Nyemah
Nicholas M. Nyemah
Attorney for Plaintiff Segan LLC
DATED: February 13, 2015
/s/ Sarah E. Stahnke
Sarah E. Stahnke
Attorney for Defendant Zynga, Inc.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
FILER’S ATTESTATION
9
10
11
12
Pursuant to Civil L.R. 5-1(i)(3), regarding signatures, I, Nicholas M. Nyemah, attest
that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained.
13
14
DATED: February 13, 2015
15
/s/ Nicholas M. Nyemah
Nicholas M. Nyemah
Attorney for Plaintiff Segan LLC
16
17
18
[PROPOSED] ORDER
19
20
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
21
22
2/18/15
DATED: ______________
23
______________________________
Honorable Kandis A. Westmore
United States Magistrate Judge
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR SCHEDULING OF SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
136789.00101/36432891v.1
3
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?