OpenTV Inc. v. Netflix Inc.

Filing 54

STIPULATION AND ORDER RESCHEDULING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND HEARING ON NETFLIX'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Case Management Statement due by 10/30/2014. Case Management Conference set for 11/6/2014 01:30 PM; Motion Hearing set for 11/6/2014 01:30 PM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Richard Seeborg. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 9/22/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/22/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Russell E. Levine, P.C. (pro hac vice) rlevine@kirkland.com Paul D. Collier (pro hac vice) pcollier@kirkland.com James B. Medek (pro hac vice) jmedek@kirkland.com Greg Polins (pro hac vice) greg.polins@kirkland.com George William Foster (pro hac vice) billy.foster@kirkland.com KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 300 North LaSalle Street Chicago, IL 60654 Telephone: (312) 862-2000 Facsimile: (312) 862-2200 DURIE TANGRI LLP DARALYN J. DURIE (SBN 169825) ddurie@durietangri.com CLEMENT S. ROBERTS (SBN 209203) croberts@durietangri.com LAURA E. MILLER (SBN 271713) lmiller@durietangri.com ZAC A. COX (SBN 283535) zcox@durietangri.com 217 Leidesdorff Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 362-6666 Facsimile: (415) 236-6300 Attorneys for Defendant NETFLIX, INC. John R. Edwards (S.B.N. 244310) john.edwards@kirkland.com Brian W. Lee (S.B.N. 255363) brian.lee@kirkland.com Mark D. Fahey (S.B.N. 294551) mark.fahey@kirkland.com KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 3330 Hillview Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94304 Telephone: (650) 859-7000 Facsimile: (650) 859-7500 Attorneys for Plaintiffs OpenTV, Inc. and Nagra France SAS 16 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 18 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 19 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 20 OPENTV, INC., and NAGRA FRANCE SAS, 21 3:14-cv-01525-RS 3:14-cv-01723-RS Plaintiffs, 22 v. 23 NETFLIX, INC. 24 Case Nos.: Defendant. SECOND STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESCHEDULING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND HEARING ON NETFLIX’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 25 Judge: Honorable Richard Seeborg 26 27 28 SECOND STIPULATED AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESCHEDULING CMC AND HEARING 3:14-cv-01525 3:14-cv-01723 1 Subject to the availability and approval of the Court, the parties hereby stipulate and respectfully 2 request that the October 9, 2014 Case Management Conference and Hearing on Defendant’s Motion for 3 Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 50) (“the Motion”) be continued to Thursday, November 6, 2014, at 1:30 4 p.m.; the deadline to file an opposition to the Motion be extended to Thursday, October 16, 2014; and 5 the deadline to file a reply to the opposition to the Motion be extended to Thursday, October 23, 2014. 6 These dates have been modified once by stipulation and Court order. (Dkt. Nos. 51, 52.) The Court has 7 not yet entered a schedule setting any further deadlines for this case. The parties request this additional 8 time to continue settlement discussions between the parties’ in-house counsel and business executives in 9 an attempt to resolve the parties’ disputes without further litigation. The parties further agree to not 10 initiate any new litigation or other proceedings, anywhere worldwide, against the other party until 11 Thursday, November 6, 2014, to not serve any additional discovery requests until Thursday, November 12 6, 2014, and to extend the deadline to respond to previously served discovery requests to Thursday, 13 November 6, 2014. The parties therefore respectfully request an order pursuant to this stipulation. 14 15 Dated: September 16, 2014 16 17 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP DURIE TANGRI LLP 18 /s/ John R. Edwards /s/ Laura E. Miller 19 John R. Edwards (SBN 244310) Laura E. Miller (SBN 271713) 20 21 22 23 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED, 24 25 26 Dated: 9/22/14 RICHARD SEEBORG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 27 28 SECOND STIPULATED AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESCHEDULING CMC AND HEARING 2 3:14-cv-01525 3:14-cv-01723

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?