Lagree Technologies, Inc. et al v. Spartacus 20th L.P. et al

Filing 114

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 111 STIPULATION WITH [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO FILE ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE A SUR-REPLY TO MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS' PATENT INFRINGEMENT CLAIMS AND RELATED C OUNTERCLAIMS PURSUANT TO FED.R. CIV. 41 filed by BodyRok Marina, L.P., BodyROK Franchise, Limited Partnership, Spartacus 20th L.P., Jakob Irion, Philip R. Palumbo, Spartacus Lombard, L.P., Spartacus 20th G.P., Inc., Sculpt Fitness Berkeley, LLC, BodyROK Franchise GP, Inc., Exercise Technologies, L.P. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on September 20, 2017. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/20/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Gordon & Rees LLP
101 W. Broadway Suite 2000
San Diego, CA 92101

11
12
13
14
15

ROBERT P. ANDRIS (SBN 130290)
[e-mail]
MICHAEL D. KANACH (SBN 271215)
[e-mail]
GORDON & REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.986.8054
KEVIN W. ALEXANDER (SBN 175204)
[e-mail]
GORDON & REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP
101 W. Broadway, Suite 2000
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants,
SPARTACUS 20TH L.P.;
SPARTACUS 20TH G.P., INC.;
PHILIP R. PALUMBO;
JAKOB IRION;
BODYROK FRANCHISE, L.P.;
BODYROK FRANCHISE G.P., INC.;
EXERCISE TECHNOLOGIES, L.P.;
BODYROK MARINA, L.P.;
SCULPT FITNESS BERKELEY, LLC;
SPARTACUS LOMBARD, L.P.

16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SAN FRANCISCO

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

LAGREE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., LAGREE
FITNESS, INC., MAXIMUM FITNESS
INCORPORATED, and SEBASTIEN LAGREE,

)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
)
SPARTACUS 20TH LP., SPARTACUS 20TH
)
G.P., INC., PHILIP R. PALUMBO, JAKOB
)
IRION, BODYROK FRANCHISE, L.P.,
)
BODYROK FRANCHISE G.P., INC., EXERCISE )
TECHNOLOGIES, L.P., BODYROK MARINA,
)
L.P., SCULPT FITNESS BERKELEY, LLC and
)
DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 3:17-cv-00795-JST
PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO
EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS
TO FILE ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT
TO FILE A SUR-REPLY TO
MOTION TO DISMISS
PLAINTIFFS’ PATENT
INFRINGEMENT CLAIMS AND
RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS
PURSUANT TO FED.R. CIV. 41(a)(2)
AND 12(b)(1);
AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
Courtroom: 9
Judge: Jon S. Tigar

PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO
FILE SUR-REPLY TO MOTION TO DISMISS PATENTS / COUNTERCLAIMS

3:17-cv-00795-JST

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Gordon & Rees LLP
101 W. Broadway Suite 2000
San Diego, CA 92101

11
12

SPARTACUS 20TH LP., SPARTACUS 20TH
G.P., INC., PHILIP R. PALUMBO, JAKOB
IRION, BODYROK FRANCHISE, L.P.,
BODYROK FRANCHISE G.P., INC., EXERCISE
TECHNOLOGIES, L.P., BODYROK MARINA,
L.P., SCULPT FITNESS BERKELEY, LLC, and
SPARTACUS LOMBARD, L.P.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Counter-Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
)
LAGREE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., LAGREE
)
FITNESS, INC., MAXIMUM FITNESS
)
INCORPORATED, and SEBASTIEN LAGREE,
)
and SPX FITNESS, INC., and ROES 1 through 10, )
inclusive,
)
)
Counter-Defendants. )
)
)
)
)

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO
FILE SUR-REPLY TO MOTION TO DISMISS PATENTS / COUNTERCLAIMS

3:17-cv-00795-JST

1
2

TO THE HONORABLE JON S. TIGAR AND THE CLERK OF THE COURT:
Pursuant to Rule 6-1(b) of the Civil Local Rules (L.R.), Plaintiffs and Counter-

3

Defendants LAGREE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., LAGREE FITNESS, INC., MAXIMUM

4

FITNESS INCORPORATED, SEBASTIEN LAGREE, and SPX FITNESS, INC. (“Plaintiffs”),

5

and Defendants and Counter-Plaintiffs SPARTACUS 20TH L.P., SPARTACUS 20TH G.P.,

6

INC., PHILIP P. PALUMBO, JAKOB IRION, BODYROK FRANCHISE, L.P., BODYROK

7

FRANCHISE G.P., INC., EXERCISE TECHNOLOGIES, L.P., BODYROK MARINA, L.P.,

8

SCULPT FITNESS BERKELEY, LLC, and SPARTACUS LOMBARD, L.P. (“Defendants”)

9

(hereinafter collectively the “Parties”), stipulate as follows:

10

WHEREAS, Defendants intend to file a motion for administrative relief pursuant to

Gordon & Rees LLP
101 W. Broadway Suite 2000
San Diego, CA 92101

11

Local Rule 7-11, requesting leave to file a sur-reply in response to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Dismiss

12

Plaintiffs’ Patent Infringement Claims and Related Counterclaims Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.

13

41(a)(2) and 12(b)(1) (Dkt. No. 79) (“Motion to Dismiss”) and Plaintiffs’ Reply (Dkt No. 104)

14

which contained a declaration and Exhibit, namely a covenant not to sue signed on September 8,

15

2017 (Dkt No. 104-1).

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

WHEREAS, counsel for the Parties have met and conferred in an attempt to reach an
agreement on the terms of a potential stipulated dismissal.
WHEREAS, the parties wish to continue meeting and conferring regarding the terms of a
potential stipulated dismissal.
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2017, the Court continued the hearing on the Motion to
Dismiss to November 2, 2017 (Dkt. No. 103).
WHEREAS, based on the foregoing, the Parties met and conferred and stipulated to a

23

one-week extension of time for Defendants to file their motion for administrative relief for leave

24

to file a sur-reply, up to and including September 22, 2107, which would give the Parties

25

sufficient time to discuss mutually-agreeable terms to a stipulated dismissal.

26
27
28

WHEREAS, the Parties have stipulated to three previous time modifications for Plaintiffs
to file their reply to the Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. Nos. 85, 96 and 99).
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs were also granted one additional modification for Plaintiffs to file
-1PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO
FILE SUR-REPLY TO MOTION TO DISMISS PATENTS / COUNTERCLAIMS

3:17-cv-00795-JST

1
2

their reply to the Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 94).
WHEREAS, the Parties have stipulated to four previous time modifications in connection

3

with responses to the Parties’ respective pleadings on April 11, 2017 (Dkt. No. 35) and May 18,

4

2017 (Dkt. No. 51), June 14, 2017 (Dkt. No. 68), and July 20, 2017 (Dkt. 82).

5

WHEREAS, this stipulation will not alter the date of any event or any deadline already

6

fixed by the Court order, and could resolve one of the issues before the Court’s November 2,

7

2017 hearing.

8
9
10

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, by and through their respective counsel, hereby
stipulate and agree that Defendants’ motion for administrative relief to file a sur-reply to the
Motion to Dismiss shall be filed no later than September 22, 2017.

Gordon & Rees LLP
101 W. Broadway Suite 2000
San Diego, CA 92101

11
12

DATED: September 15, 2017

GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP

13
By:

14
15
16
17
18
19
20

/s/ Robert P. Andris
Robert P. Andris
Michael D. Kanach
Attorneys for Defendants,
SPARTACUS 20TH LP. ;
SPARTACUS 20TH G.P., INC.;
PHILIP R. PALUMBO;
JAKOB IRION;
BODYROK FRANCHISE, L.P.;
BODYROK FRANCHISE G.P., INC.;
EXERCISE TECHNOLOGIES, L.P.;
BODYROK MARINA, L.P.;
SCULPT FITNESS BERKELEY, LLC;
SPARTACUS LOMBARD, L.P.

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

DATED: September 15, 2017

NEUSTEL LAW OFFICES, LTD
By:

/s/ Chad E. Ziegler
Chad E. Ziegler (Pro Hac Vice)
Edward K. Runyan (Pro Hac Vice)
Michelle G. Breit
Attorneys for Plaintiffs,
LAGREE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;
LAGREE FITNESS, INC.;
MAXIMUM FITNESS INCORPORATED;
SEBASTIEN LAGREE;
SPX FITNESS, INC.
-2-

PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO
FILE SUR-REPLY TO MOTION TO DISMISS PATENTS / COUNTERCLAIMS

3:17-cv-00795-JST

1
2
3
4

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

5
6
7
8

DATED: September 20, 2017
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Honorable Jon S. Tigar

9
10

Gordon & Rees LLP
101 W. Broadway Suite 2000
San Diego, CA 92101

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO
FILE SUR-REPLY TO MOTION TO DISMISS PATENTS / COUNTERCLAIMS

3:17-cv-00795-JST