dpiX LLC v. Yieldboost Tech Inc et al

Filing 69

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 68 STIPULATION and Proposed Order selecting Private ADR by dpiX LLC Regarding ADR Process filed by dpiX LLC. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on September 4, 2015. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/4/2015)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DPIX LLC, CASE NO. 14-CV-05382-JST Plaintiff(s), v. FURTHER STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING ADR PROCESS YIELDBOOST TECH, INC., and KYO YOUNG CHUNG Defendant(s). _______________________________/ Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the following further stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5: The parties agree to participate in the following ADR process: Court Processes: ☐ Non-binding Arbitration (ADR L.R. 4) ☐ Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5) ☐ Mediation (ADR L.R. 6) (Note: Parties who believe that an early settlement conference with a Magistrate Judge is appreciably more likely to meet their needs than any other form of ADR must participate in an ADR phone conference and may not file this form. They must instead file a Notice of Need for ADR Phone Conference. See Civil Local Rule 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5) Private Process: ☒ Private ADR (please identify process and provider) Mediation with private mediator to be determined. The parties agree to hold the ADR session by: ☐ the presumptive deadline (The deadline is 90 days from the date of the order referring the case to an ADR process unless otherwise ordered. ) ☒ other requested deadline 60 days from date of ADR Order. Dated: September 3, 2015 /s/Stephanie O. Sparks Attorney for Plaintiff Dated: September 3, 2015 /s/Matthew Prebeg Attorney for Defendant CONTINUE TO FOLLOWING PAGE [PROPOSED] ORDER The parties’ stipulation is adopted and IT IS SO ORDERED. The parties’ stipulation is modified as follows, and IT IS SO ORDERED. S DISTRICT TE C TA UNIT ED RT U O S DERED SO OR ________________________ IT IS Dated: September 4, 2015 R NIA XX ☐ ☐ UNITED STATES JUDGE A H LI RT ER S . Ti ga r FO NO n J u d ge J o N F D IS T IC T O R C When filing this document in ECF, please be sure to use the appropriate Docket Event, e.g., “Stipulation and Proposed Order Selecting Mediation.” Rev. 12/11 Page 2 of 2 CONTINUE TO FOLLOWING PAGE ATTESTATION I, Stephanie O. Sparks, am the ECF user whose User ID and Password are being used to file the FURTHER STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING ADR PROCESS. In compliance with Civil L.R. 5.1(i)(3), I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from signatory Matthew Prebeg. DATED: September 3, 2015 HOGE, FENTON, JONES & APPEL, INC. By /s/Stephanie O. Sparks Stephanie O. Sparks Attorneys for Plaintiff DPIX LLC

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?