Artifex Software, Inc. v. BigTinCan Holdings Pty. Ltd.

Filing 55

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 54 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Joint Stipulation Regarding Continuance of July 23, 2015 Further Case Management Conference filed by Artifex Software, Inc. Case Management Statement due by 8/20/2015. Further Case Management Conference set for 8/27/2015 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 7/20/15. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/20/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DARIN W. SNYDER (S.B. #136003) dsnyder@omm.com DAVID J. SEPANIK (S.B. #221527) dsepanik@omm.com JESSE J. KOEHLER (S.B. #300530) jkoehler@omm.com O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor San Francisco, California 94111-3823 Telephone: (415) 984-8700 Facsimile: (415) 984-8701 Attorneys for Plaintiff ARTIFEX SOFTWARE, INC. 8 9 10 11 12 13 MARK D. FLANAGAN (S.B. #130303) mark.flanagan@wilmerhale.com NATHAN L. WALKER (S.B. #206128) nathan.walker@wilmerhale.com WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR, LLP 950 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 Telephone: (650) 858-6000 Facsimile: (650) 858-6100 14 15 Attorneys for Defendants BIGTINCAN MOBILE PTY. LTD. and BTC MOBILITY LLC 16 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 18 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 19 SAN FRANCISCO 20 21 ARTIFEX SOFTWARE, INC., Plaintiff, 22 23 24 25 v. BIGTINCAN MOBILE PTY. LTD.; and BTC MOBILITY LLC, Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-05415-EMC JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING CONTINUANCE OF JULY 23, 2015 FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Defendants. 26 27 28 JOINT STIPULATION RE: CMC AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. 3:14-CV-05415-EMC 1 Plaintiff Artifex Software, Inc. and defendants BigTinCan Mobile Pty. Ltd. and BTC 2 Mobility LLC, through their respective counsel of record, and subject to the approval of the 3 Court, hereby agree and stipulate as follows: 4 5 1. The parties’ settlement discussions have continued since the June 11, 2014 mediation session. 6 2. The parties have made significant progress toward settlement. 7 3. The parties would like to obtain additional time to exhaust their settlement efforts 8 9 before the next Case Management Conference. 4. Given the parties’ continuing desire and effort to reach a settlement, good cause 10 exists, and the parties respectfully ask the Court, to reset the Further Case Management 11 Conference—currently scheduled for July 23, 2015—for August 27, 2015 at 10:30 a.m. or for a 12 subsequent date more convenient for the Court. 13 SO STIPULATED. 14 Dated: July 17, 2015 15 16 DARIN W. SNYDER O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP By: /s/ Darin W. Snyder Darin W. Snyder 17 Attorneys for Plaintiff ARTIFEX SOFTWARE, INC. 18 19 20 21 Dated: July 17, 2015 NATHAN L. WALKER WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR, LLP 22 23 24 25 By: /s/ Nathan L Walker Nathan L. Walker Attorneys for Defendants BIGTINCAN MOBILE PTY. LTD. and BTC MOBILITY LLC 26 27 28 -2- JOINT STIPULATION RE: CMC AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. 3:14-CV-05415-EMC 1 ATTESTATION 2 I hereby attest that the other signatory listed concurs in this filing’s content and has 3 4 authorized the filing. Dated: July 17, 2015 O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 5 6 By: 7 /s/ Darin W. Snyder Darin W. Snyder 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3- JOINT STIPULATION RE: CMC AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. 3:14-CV-05415-EMC 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 IT IS ORDERED that the foregoing Stipulation is approved. The Further Case 3 Management Conference is reset for ________________, 2015 at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom 5, 4 17th Floor, San Francisco. S R NIA . Chen J ER 12 FO ward M udge Ed H 11 RT 10 NO 9 DERED SO OR ED IT IS DIFI AS MO LI 8 Honorable Edward M. Chen United States District Judge A 7 Dated: ___________, 2015 S DISTRICT TE C ________________________________________________ TA RT U O 6 7/20 UNIT ED 5 August 27 N F D IS T IC T O R C 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -4- JOINT STIPULATION RE: CMC AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. 3:14-CV-05415-EMC

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?