Collabrx, Inc. v. The Jackson Laboratory

Filing 19

STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 6/15/16. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/15/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Jeffrey W. Shopoff (Bar No. 46278)
Gregory S. Cavallo (Bar No. 173270)
James M. Robinson (Bar No. 238063)
SHOPOFF CAVALLO & KIRSCH LLP
601 Montgomery Street, Suite 1110
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Andrew N. Thomases (Bar No. 177339)
Henry Y. Huang (Bar No. 252832)
ROPES & GRAY LLP
1900 University Avenue, 6th Floor
East Palo Alto, CA 94303-2284
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Attorneys for Plaintiff,
CollabRx, Inc.

Attorneys for Defendant,
The Jackson Laboratory

7
8
9
10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

)
COLLABRX, INC., a Delaware corporation, )
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v.
)
)
THE JACKSON LABORATORY, a Maine )
non-profit corporation,
)
)
)
Defendant.
)
)

Case No. 3:16-cv-02838-EMC
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER ON BRIEFING SCHEDULES
FOR PENDING MOTIONS
(modified)

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON BRIEFING SCHEDULES
FOR PENDING MOTIONS
Case No. 3:16-cv-02838-EMC

STIPULATION

1

Plaintiff CollabRx, Inc. (“CollabRx”) and Defendant The Jackson Laboratory (“JAX”),

2
3

through their counsel, hereby stipulate and agree that:

4

WHEREAS, JAX filed a notice of removal of this action on May 26, 2016 (ECF No. 1);

5

WHEREAS, JAX filed a motion to dismiss CollabRx’s Complaint on June 2, 2016, with

6

a response due by June 16, 2016, a reply due by June 23, 2016, and a hearing date of July 7,

7

2016 (ECF Nos. 10-11);

8

WHEREAS, CollabRx filed a motion to remand on June 10, 2016, with a response due

9

by June 24, 2016, a reply due by July 1, 2016, and a hearing date of July 28, 2016 (ECF No.

10

17);

11

WHEREAS, the parties have conferred and agreed to have both JAX’s motion to dismiss

12

and CollabRx’s motion to remand heard at the same time on July 28, 2016, the currently noticed

13

hearing date for CollabRx’s motion to remand;

14

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to brief both pending motions on the same schedule

15

with new deadlines to accommodate planned vacations by counsel for both parties and the

16

Independence Day holiday, while permitting the Court time to review the parties’ submissions

17

in advance of the currently scheduled July 28, 2016 hearing date;

18

WHEREAS, no prior time modifications have been requested or made in this case, no

19

case schedule has been entered, and the parties’ agreed time modifications would not affect any

20

case schedule other than moving the currently noticed hearing date for JAX’s motion to dismiss;

21

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties, through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate,

22

subject to the Court’s approval, that JAX’s motion to dismiss and CollabRx’s motion to remand

23

be heard at the same time on July 28, 2016 (or another date of the Court’s choosing), that the

24

deadline for oppositions to both pending motions be extended to July 1, 2016, and that the

25

deadline for replies be extended to July 14, 2016.

26

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

27
28
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON BRIEFING SCHEDULES
FOR PENDING MOTIONS
Case No. 3:16-cv-02838-EMC

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Dated: June 14, 2016

By

/s/ Gregory S. Cavallo
Gregory S. Cavallo
SHOPOFF CAVALLO & KIRSCH LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiff
COLLABRX, INC.
/s/ Andrew Thomases
Andrew Thomases
ROPES & GRAY LLP
Attorneys for Defendant
THE JACKSON LABORATORY

8
9
10
11

In accordance with Local Rule 5-1, the filer of this document hereby attests that the
concurrence to the filing of this document has been obtained from the other signatories hereto.

12

16
17
18

The motion to remand
to be heard on 7/28/16 at
Dated: __________________________ remains_______________________________ 1:30
Edward M. Chen
p.m. The 7/7/16 hearing
United States District Judge
on the motion to dismiss is vacated and to be reset if the

S
UNIT
ED

21
22

RT

24

D
RDERE
S SO O IED
IT I
DIF
AS MO
dwar
Judge E

ER

26

A

H

25

en

d M. Ch

NO

23

RT
U
O

19
20

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

Court denies the motion to remand.

R NIA

15

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. Oppositions to both
motions shall be filed by 7/1/16. Replies shall be filed by 7/14/16.

FO

14

[PROPOSED] ORDER

LI

13

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

27
28
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON BRIEFING SCHEDULES
FOR PENDING MOTIONS
Case No. 3:16-cv-02838-EMC