Cutting Edge Solutions, LLC v. Sustainable Low Maintenance Grass, LLC et al

Filing 26

ORDER ON MOTION TO CHANGE TIME re 20 and 23 Motions for Extension of Time. The hearing on the Motion to Stay will be held on August 20, 2014. CES has already filed its opposition to that motion. SLMG's reply is due July 29, 2014. The hear ing on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction will be held on September 17, 2014. SLMG's opposition is due August 27, 2014. CES's reply is due September 3, 2014. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 07/25/2014. SLMG's answer or other response to the Complaint is due September 10, 2014. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2014)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

CUTTING EDGE SOLUTIONS, LLC,

Case No. 14-cv-02770-WHO

Plaintiff,
8
v.

ORDER ON MOTION TO CHANGE
TIME

9
SUSTAINABLE LOW MAINTENANCE
GRASS, LLC, et al.,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Defendants.

Re: Dkt. No. 20

12
13

Defendant Sustainable Low Maintenance Grass, LLC (“SLMG”) moves to change the

14

August 20, 2014, hearing date for plaintiff Cutting Edge Solution, LLC’s (“CES”) pending motion

15

for a preliminary injunction until after SLMG’s pending motion to stay is heard. SLMG also

16

wants to postpone the current deadlines for filing its answer or response to the Complaint and its

17

opposition to the preliminary injunction motion.

18

In response to the Court’s Order to respond to the motion to change time, CES filed a

19

combined opposition to SLMG’s motions to change time and to stay. CES argues that the motion

20

to stay should be denied because SLMG did not have standing to sue in Massachusetts and the

21

Massachusetts suit was anticipatory and forum shopping, and that it will be irreparably harmed by

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

postponing the hearing date on its preliminary injunction motion. Dkt. No. 24.
After considering the parties’ arguments, I conclude that judicial economy is best served
by hearing SLMG’s motion for a stay before hearing the preliminary injunction motion.
Moreover, a delay of a few weeks on CES’s motion for a preliminary injunction is unlikely to
result in irreparable harm to CES given that: (i) SMLG’s products at issue, whose names and
marketing CES contends violate CES’s trademark, have been on the market for well over a year;
(ii) CES was on notice of, and started investigating, SLMG’s use of the mark in January 2013; (iii)

1

CES did not serve a cease-and-desist letter until March 2014; (iv) CES did not file this action until

2

June 16, 2014; and (v) CES did not move for a preliminary injunction until July 2, 2014.

3

Given the foregoing, I ORDER as follows:

4

The hearing on the Motion to Stay will be held on August 20, 2014. CES has already filed

5
6
7

its opposition to that motion. SLMG’s reply is due July 29, 2014.
The hearing on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction will be held on September 17, 2014.
SLMG’s opposition is due August 27, 2014. CES’s reply is due September 3, 2014.

8

SLMG’s answer or other response to the Complaint is due September 10, 2014.

9

IT IS SO ORDERED.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Dated: July 25, 2014
______________________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2