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

Filing 69

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 66 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER To Extend Time To Respond To Complaint filed by Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on July 25, 2016. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

JEFFREY T. THOMAS, SBN 106409
[e-mail]
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
3161 Michelson Drive
Irvine, CA 92612-4412
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 949.451.4220
SAMUEL LIVERSIDGE, SBN 180578
[e-mail]
BLAINE H. EVANSON, SBN 254338
[e-mail]
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 213.229.7520
Attorneys for Defendant
HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE COMPANY

12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

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

CASE NO. 3:16-cv-01393-JST
JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME
TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
PURSUANT TO L.R. 6-2
ACTION FILED: March 22, 2016

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

24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
– CASE NO. 3:16-CV-01393-JST

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

WHEREAS, on July 15, 2016, the Court granted in part and denied in part Defendant Hewlett
Packard Enterprise Company’s (“HPE”) motion to dismiss and granted Plaintiffs Oracle America,
Inc. and Oracle International Corp. (“Oracle”) 30 days, or until August 15, 2016, to amend their
complaint, (ECF 65);
WHEREAS, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(4)(A), HPE’s answer to Oracle’s current
complaint is currently due on July 29, 2016;
WHEREAS, the parties have met and conferred and Oracle has indicated that it may file an
amended complaint on or before August 15, 2016;
WHEREAS, HPE would then have to file a response to any amended complaint;
WHEREAS, the parties agree it would be more efficient for HPE to file a single response to
the operative complaint rather than having to file a separate answer to the current complaint and
response to any amended complaint;
THEREFORE, subject to the approval of the Court, the parties hereby stipulate that HPE shall
have until the earlier of (i) 14 days following the date Oracle files its amended complaint, or (ii)
August 29, 2016, to file its response to the operative complaint.
Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: July 21, 2016

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

21
22
23
24
25
26

By: /s/

Blaine H. Evanson
Blaine H. Evanson

Attorneys for Defendant
HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE COMPANY
I hereby attest that all signatories to this stipulation
concur in its filing.

27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

1

JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
– CASE NO. 3:16-CV-01393-JST

1
2

Dated: July 21, 2016

LATHAM & WATKINS, LLP

3
4

Christopher B. Campbell
Christopher B. Campbell

By: /s/

5

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
ORACLE AMERICA, INC. AND ORACLE
INTERNATIONAL CORP.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Pursuant to Stipulation, it is SO ORDERED. Defendant Hewlett-Packard Enterprise Co.’s
response to Oracle’s operative complaint shall be due by the earlier of (i) 14 days following the date
Oracle files its amended complaint, or (ii) August 29, 2016.

S

DATED: July 25, 2016

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

15

[PROPOSED] ORDER

____________________________________

17

The Honorable JonORD
S. Tigar
T IS SO
United I
States District Judge

UNIT
ED

16

RT

20

ER

. Ti ga r

22

A

H

21

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

2

R NIA

nS
J u d ge J o

FO

NO

19

LI

18

ERED

JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
– CASE NO. 3:16-CV-01393-JST

C