International Test Solutions, Inc v. MIPOX International Corporation et al

Filing 143

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 142 TO CONTINUE DATES IN SCHEDULING ORDER. Further Case Management Conference previously set for 10/5/2017 continued to 12/7/2017 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 9/8/17. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/8/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP
THOMAS J. DONOVAN (Pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
MARK A. HAGEDORN (Pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
One N. Wacker Dr., Ste 4400, Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
ROYA RAHMANPOUR (SBN 285076)
[e-mail]
2029 Century Park East, Ste 300, L.A., CA 90067
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendants MIPOX CORP., MIPOX
INTERNATIONAL CORP. and MGN
INTERNATIONAL, INC.
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
DAVID S. BLOCH (SBN: 184530)
[e-mail]
AMANDA L. GROVES (SBN: 187216)
[e-mail]
101 California Street, Suite 3400
San Francisco, CA 94111-5840
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
JAMES C. LIN (SBN: 271673)
[e-mail]
275 Middlefield Rd., Suite 205
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
INTERNATIONAL TEST SOLUTIONS, INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
INTERNATIONAL TEST SOLUTIONS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
MIPOX INTERNATIONAL CORP., et al.
Defendants.

Case No. 3:16-cv-00791-RS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO CONTINUE DATES IN
SCHEDULING ORDER

24
25
26
27

MIPOX CORPORATION,
Counter-Plaintiff,
v.
INTERNATIONAL TEST SOLUTIONS, INC.,
Counter-Defendant.

28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Pursuant to Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiff International Test Solutions, Inc., (“ITS”)
and Defendants Mipox Corporation (“Mipox”), Mipox International Corporation (“MIC”), and
MGN International, Inc. (“MGN”) (collectively, “Parties”), through their respective undersigned
counsel, hereby stipulate1 and request an order to continue the dates in the operating scheduling
order (Dkt. No. 127) as set forth below. The requested continuance of dates would allow the Parties
to focus on finalizing a written settlement agreement that is in progress. Accordingly, the Parties
hereby stipulate through their respective counsel of record as follows:

8
9

WHEREAS, on May 18, 2017, this Court entered the operating case management
scheduling order (Dkt. No. 127);

10
11

WHEREAS, on August 1, 2017, the Parties participated in a successful mediation session
(Dkt. No. 135);

12
13

WHEREAS, the Parties believe a settlement is likely imminent and have been working
toward finalizing a written settlement agreement;

14

WHEREAS, the Parties wish to focus on finalizing a written settlement agreement;

15
16

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the Parties hereto that the operating case
management scheduling order be modified as follows:

17
18
19
20
21
22

Event
Complete Non-Expert Discovery
Exchange of Expert Reports
Exchange of Rebuttal Expert Reports
Complete Expert Discovery
Further Case Management Conference
Hearing for Pretrial Motions
Final Pretrial Conference

Current Deadline
September 29, 2017
October 27, 2017
December 1, 2017
January 12, 2018
October 5, 2017 at 10:00 a.m.
March 29, 2018
May 24, 2018 at 10:00 a.m.

Stipulated Proposed Deadline
November 28, 2017
December 28, 2017
January 15, 2018
February 12, 2018
December 7, 2017 at 10:00 a.m.
April 26, 2018
May 24, 2018 at 10:00 a.m.
(No Change)

Trial

June 4, 2018 at 9:00 a.m.

June 4, 2018 at 9:00 a.m.
(No Change)

23
24
25
1

26
27
28

The parties previously stipulated to extend time for disclosure of invalidity contentions (Dkt. No. 39), to extend time
for the parties’ joint claim construction and prehearing statement (Dkt. No. 44), to extend the time for filing of the
opening claim construction brief (Dkt. No. 57), and to extend the time for responsive and reply claim construction
briefs (Dkt. No. 64). The Court previously granted a Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint and continued the
Markman hearing (Dkt. No. 70). Finally, Magistrate Judge Spero granted the Parties’ request for continuances of a
court-ordered meet and confer relating to a discovery dispute issue. (Dkt. Nos. 137 and 141).
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1

Dated: September 8, 2017

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP

2
3

By: /s/ David S. Bloch
David S. Bloch
Amanda L. Groves
James C. Lin
Attorneys for Plaintiff
International Test Solutions, Inc.

4
5
6
7

Dated: September 8, 2017

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

8
9

By: /s/ Roya Rahmanpour
Thomas J. Donovan
Mark A. Hagedorn
Roya Rahmanpour
Attorneys for Defendants Mipox Corp.,
Mipox International Corp. and MGN
International, Inc.

10
11
12
13

CONCURRENCE IN FILING
14
I, Roya Rahmanpour, hereby attest that the concurrence to the filing of this document has
15
been obtained from each signatory hereto.
16
17

Dated: September 8, 2017

18
19

/s/ Roya Rahmanpour
Roya Rahmanpour

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
21
22

Dated: 9/8/17

____________________________________
Richard Seeborg
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER