Shenzhenshi Haitiecheng Science and Technology Co., Ltd. v. Rearden LLC et al

Filing 143

ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS AT ECF NOS. 139 AND 140 re 140 MOTION to Expedite BRIEFING AND HEARING SCHEDULE filed by Mova, LLC, MO2, LLC, Rearden Mova, LLC, Rearden LLC; 139 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction < i>Notice of Motion and Motion For Entry of Default Judgment Against Shenzhenshi Haitiecheng Science and Technology Co., Ltd.; and For Preliminary Injunction Regarding The Mova Assets filed by Mova, LLC, MO2, LLC, Rearden Mova, LLC, Rearden LLC. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on May 13, 2016. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/13/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

VIRTUE GLOBAL HOLDINGS LIMITED,

Case No. 15-cv-00797-JST

Plaintiff,
8
v.

ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS'
MOTIONS AT ECF NOS. 139 AND 140

9
10

REARDEN LLC, et al.,

Re: ECF Nos. 139, 140

Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

On May 6, 2016, Defendants filed a Motion for Entry of Default Judgment Against

13

Shenzhenshi Haitiecheng Science and Technology Co., Ltd. and for Preliminary Injunction

14

Regarding the Mova Assets. ECF No. 139. Defendants also request that the Court set an

15

expedited briefing schedule, ECF No. 140, which Plaintiff opposes, ECF No. 142.

16

Defendants’ motion for entry of default judgment against Shenzhenshi Haitiecheng

17

Science and Technology Company (“SHST”) relates to SHST’s alleged failures to comply with its

18

discovery obligations. The Court previously referred all discovery matters to Magistrate Judge

19

Sallie Kim. See ECF No. 81. Thus, the Court orders Defendants to raise the entry of default

20

judgment portion of the motion before Judge Kim in the first instance. The undersigned will

21

address the preliminary injunction portion of Defendants’ motion.

22

Good cause does not support Defendants’ request for an expedited briefing schedule. See

23

Civil L.R. 6-3; Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(c)(1)(C). The Court accordingly sets the following schedule for

24

Defendants’ motion for a preliminary injunction: Plaintiff’s opposition to the motion shall be due

25

by May 20, 2016, and Defendants’ reply in support for the motion shall be due by May 27, 2016.

26

///

27

///

28

///

1
2
3
4
5

The hearing on Defendants’ motion shall be on June 16, 2016 at 2:00 p.m.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 13, 2016
______________________________________
JON S. TIGAR
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2