ICE Consulting, Inc. et al v. Jensen

Filing 72

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 70 Stipulation by All Parties Extending Time for Plaintiffs to Respond to Defendant's Counterclaims and [Proposed] Order filed by ICE Consulting, Inc. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 10/11/16. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/11/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

NOSSAMAN LLP
VERONICA M. GRAY (SBN 72572)
[e-mail]
ANDREW C. CRANE (SBN 285211)
[e-mail]
18101 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 1800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 949.833.7878
S. ASHAR AHMED (SBN 256711)
[e-mail]
50 California Street, 34th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.398.2438
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants
ICE Consulting, Inc.; Uzair Sattar;
and Derick Needham

13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14
15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

17
18

ICE CONSULTING, INC., UZAIR
SATTAR, and DERICK NEEDHAM

19

Plaintiffs and CounterDefendants,

20
21
22

vs.
GAVIN JENSEN,
Defendant and CounterClaimant.

23
24
25

Case No: 3:16-cv-04349-EMC
STIPULATION BY ALL PARTIES
EXTENDING TIME FOR
PLAINTIFFS TO RESPOND TO
DEFENDANT’S
COUNTERCLAIMS AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER
[LOCAL RULE 6-2]
Counterclaims Filed:
Counterclaims Served:
Initial Response Date:
New Date to Respond:

Sept. 16, 2016
Sept. 16, 2016
Oct. 11, 2016
Oct. 25, 2016

26
Trial: Not Set

27
28

Case No. 3:16-cv-04349-EMC

STIPULATION BY ALL PARTIES EXTENDING TIME FOR PLAINTIFFS TO RESPOND TO
DEFENDANT’S COUNTERCLAIMS AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
26674193.v1

1

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(1) and Local Rule 6-2

2

and 8-3, Plaintiffs ICE Consulting, Inc., Uzair Sattar, and Derick Needham

3

(collectively, “Plaintiffs”), and Defendant Gavin Jensen (“Defendant”)

4

(collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby enter

5

into this Stipulation Extending Time For Plaintiffs to Respond to Defendant’s

6

Counterclaims. This Stipulation is based on the contents of this stipulation and the

7

Declaration of Andrew C. Crane (“Crane Dec.”), filed concurrently herewith.

8

WHEREAS, on September 16, 2016, Defendant filed an Answer and

9

Counterclaims to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 62). Crane Dec.,

10
11

¶ 2.
WHEREAS, at the September 15, 2016 Motion for Preliminary Injunction

12

hearing, the Court ordered the Parties to commence settlement discussions

13

forthwith. Crane Dec., ¶ 3.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

WHEREAS, the Parties are currently engaged in settlement discussions per
the Court’s instruction. Crane Dec., ¶ 3.
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs’ response to Defendant’s Counterclaims is due on
October 11, 2016. Crane Dec., ¶ 4.
WHEREAS, the Parties wish to continue focusing exclusively on settlement
negotiations before incurring any additional expense. Crane Dec., ¶ 4.
WHEREAS, there have been no previous time modifications in this case.
Crane Dec., ¶ 5.
WHEREAS, the Court has set the Case Management Conference in this
matter for November 8, 2016. Crane Dec., ¶ 6.
WHEREAS, the extension sought by this Stipulation will not affect the
schedule for this case. Crane Dec., ¶ 6.

26
27
-1-

28

Case No. 3:16-cv-04349-EMC

STIPULATION BY ALL PARTIES EXTENDING TIME FOR PLAINTIFFS TO RESPOND TO
DEFENDANT’S COUNTERCLAIMS AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
26674193.v1

1

THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE:

2

That Plaintiffs’ deadline to respond to Defendant’s Counterclaims shall be

3

extended to October 25, 2016.

4

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

5
6

Date:

October 7, 2016

7
8

NOSSAMAN LLP
VERONICA M. GRAY
ANDREW C. CRANE
By: /s/ Andrew C. Crane
Andrew C. Crane

9
10

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and CounterDefendants
ICE Consulting, Inc.; Uzair Sattar;
and Derick Needham

11
12
13
14 Date:

October 7, 2016

15

DHILLON LAW GROUP INC
By: /s/ Nitoj P. Singh
Nitoj P. Singh

16

Attorneys for Defendant and CounterClaimant
Gavin Jensen

17
18
19
20

ORDER
S

23
24

D

RDERE

OO
IT IS S

R NIA

UNIT
ED

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

22

27
-2-

A

H

ER

LI

RT

26

FO

NO

en
_________________________________
d M. Ch
e Edwar
Judg
Hon. Edward M. Chen
United States District Judge

25

28

RT
U
O

21

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

N

C
OF
D IS T IC T
RCase No. 3:16-cv-04349-EMC

STIPULATION BY ALL PARTIES EXTENDING TIME FOR PLAINTIFFS TO RESPOND TO
DEFENDANT’S COUNTERCLAIMS AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
26674193.v1