Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Google Inc.
Filing
68
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 66 STIPULATION and Proposed Order selecting Private ADR by Eolas Technologies Incorporated filed by Eolas Technologies Incorporated. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on May 22, 2017. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/22/2017)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Eolas Technologies Incorporated
CASE No C 3:17-cv-01138-JST
Plaintiff(s)
v.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS
Google Inc.
Defendant(s)
Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the following
stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5. The parties agree to participate in the
following ADR process:
Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5)
Mediation (ADR L.R. 6)
■
Private ADR (specify process and provider)
Private mediator to be mutually agreed on by
the parties.
Note: Magistrate judges do not conduct
mediations under ADR L.R. 6. To request an
early settlement conference with a Magistrate
Judge, you must file a Notice of Need for
ADR Phone Conference. Do not use this
form. See Civil Local Rule 16-8 and ADR
L.R. 3-5.
The parties agree to hold the ADR session by:
the presumptive deadline (90 days from the date of the order referring the case to ADR,
unless otherwise ordered. )
within 14 days of completion of dispositive motion
■ other requested deadline:
briefing
May 17, 2017
/s/ Stephanie Adams Ryan
Date:
Attorney for Plaintiff
/s/ Carl Anderson
Date: May 17, 2017
Attorney for Defendant
x
IT IS SO ORDERED
IT IS SO ORDERED WITH MODIFICATIONS:
Date: May 22, 2017
U.S. DISTRICT/MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Important! E-file this form in ECF using the appropriate event among these choices: “Stipulation & Proposed
Order Selecting Mediation” or “Stipulation & Proposed Order Selecting ENE” or “Stipulation & Proposed
Order Selecting Private ADR.”
Form ADR-Stip rev. 1-2017
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?