Oracle America, Inc. et al v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company

Filing 40

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 39 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Joint Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding Case Scheduling filed by Oracle America, Inc., Oracle International Corporation. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on May 6, 2016. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/6/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
Christopher S. Yates (SBN 161273)
Christopher B. Campbell (SBN 254776)
Meaghan P. Thomas-Kennedy (SBN 303578)
505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, California 94111-6538
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.395.8095
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
ORACLE CORPORATION
Dorian Daley (SBN 129049)
Deborah K. Miller (SBN 95527)
500 Oracle Parkway
M/S 5op7
Redwood City, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 650.506.7114
Email [e-mail]
[e-mail]

12

ORACLE CORPORATION
Jeffrey S. Ross (SBN 138172)
10 Van de Graaff Drive
Burlington, MA 01803
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 781.238.6273
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Oracle America, Inc., and Oracle
International Corporation

13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

17
18
19

ORACLE AMERICA, INC., a Delaware
corporation; ORACLE INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION, a California corporation

20
21
22
23
24

Plaintiffs,

No. 16-cv-01393-JST
JOINT STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING
CASE SCHEDULING

v.
HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE
COMPANY, a Delaware corporation; and DOES
1–50,
Defendants.

25
26
27
28
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
REGARDING CASE SCHEDULING
CASE NO. 16-cv-01393-JST

1
2

WHEREAS, the Court has not yet set a date for the initial case management conference
in the above-captioned action;

3

WHEREAS, on April 29, 2016, Defendant Hewlett-Packard Enterprise Co. (“HPE”) filed

4

a Motion To Dismiss, Dkt. No. 34 (“Motion to Dismiss”), and noticed the Motion to Dismiss for

5

hearing on June 30, 2016;

6
7
8
9

WHEREAS, on May 2, 2016, HPE filed an Administrative Motion to Schedule Case
Management Conference, Dkt. No. 37 (“Administrative Motion”);
WHEREAS, HPE and Plaintiffs Oracle America, Inc. and Oracle International
Corporation (collectively, “Oracle”) have further met and conferred regarding HPE’s

10

Administrative Motion, a date for the parties’ conference pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

11

Procedure 26(f), and the hearing date for HPE’s Motion to Dismiss;

12
13

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate, and ask the Court to order, as follows:
1. HPE’s Administrative Motion, Dkt. No. 37, is hereby withdrawn, without

14

prejudice to HPE refiling the Administrative Motion if this stipulation is not

15

accepted by the Court.

16
17
18

2. The parties shall hold their Rule 26(f) conference on May 31, 2016, at a time to be
agreed upon between the parties.
3. The deadline for Oracle’s opposition to HPE’s Motion to Dismiss shall be

19

extended to May 24, 2016. The deadline for HPE’s reply in support of its Motion

20

to Dismiss shall be extended to June 10, 2016.

21

4. HPE’s Motion To Dismiss shall be reset for hearing on July 14, 2016 at 2:00 p.m.

22

5. The initial case management conference shall be set either for July 14, 2016 (to

23

occur after the hearing on HPE’s Motion to Dismiss) or, if the Court is not

24

available to conduct the two proceedings on that date, for the first available case

25

management conference date after June 17, 2016.

26
27
28
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
REGARDING CASE SCHEDULING
CASE NO. 16-cv-01393-JST

1

Dated: May 5, 2016

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

2
By:

3

/s/ Christopher S. Yates
Christopher S. Yates
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Oracle America, Inc. and
Oracle International Corporation

4
5
6

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

7
8

By:

/s/ Blaine H. Evanson
Blaine H. Evanson
Attorneys for Defendant
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.

9
10

R NIA

nS
J u d ge J o

ER

H

18
19

. Ti ga r

FO

RT

17

Hon. Jon S. Tigar
United States District Judge

NO

16

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

LI

15

TC

A

14

May 6, 2016
Dated: _____________________________

E
AT
T

RT
U
O

13

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. STRIC
S DI

S

12

UNIT
ED

11

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

2

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
REGARDING CASE SCHEDULING
CASE NO. 16-cv-01393-JST

1
2

ATTESTATION
I, Christopher S. Yates, am counsel for Plaintiffs Oracle America, Inc. and

3

Oracle International Corporation. I am the registered ECF user whose username and password

4

are being used to file this stipulation and proposed order. In compliance with Local Rule

5

5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that the above-identified counsel concurred in this filing.

6
7

Dated: May 5, 2016

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

8
9

By:

/s/ Christopher S. Yates
Christopher S. Yates
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Oracle America, Inc. and
Oracle International Corporation

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

3

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
REGARDING CASE SCHEDULING
CASE NO. 16-cv-01393-JST