Apple Computer, Inc. v. Podfitness, Inc.

Filing 91

Minute Entry: Motion Hearing held on 12/14/2007 before Charles R. Breyer re 88 MOTION to Quash Defendant's Notice of Deposition Under Rule 30(b)(6) filed by Apple Computer, Inc. Motion submitted. Parties to advise Judge Spero by close of business on 12/18/7 if this issue has been resolved. (Court Reporter Sahar McVickar.) (klh, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 12/14/2007)

Download PDF
Apple Computer, Inc. v. Podfitness, Inc. Doc. 91 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTE ORDER CASE NO. C 06-05805 SBA (JCS) CASE NAME: APPLE COMPUTER INC. v. PODFITNESS INC. JUDGE CHARLES R. BREYER DATE: December 14, 2007 COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF: Lisa Martens (T)* TIME: 6 mins COURTROOM DEPUTY: Karen Hom COURT REPORTER: Sahar McVickar COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT: James Magleby (T)* James Wagstaff (T)* PROCEEDINGS: RULING: 1. Pla's Motion to Quash Defendant's Deposition Submitted Subpoena's [docket no. 88] _________________________________________________________________________ ORDERED AFTER HEARING: Parties shall advise Judge Spero by the close of business on Tuesday, 12/18/7 if this issue has been resolved. If the issue is unresolved, Court will issue an Order on Wednesday, 12/19/7 ___________________________________________________________________________ ORDER TO BE PREPARED BY: () Plaintiff () Defendant (X) Court CASE CONTINUED TO: ___________________________________________________________________________ Number of Depos: Expert Disclosure: Motions Hearing: Number of Experts: Expert Rebuttal: at 9:30 a.m. Discovery Cutoff: Expert Discovery Cutoff: Pretrial Conference: at 1:30 p.m. Trial Date: cc: Chambers; Karen * (T) = Telephonic Appearance at 8:30 a.m. ()Jury ()Court Set for days __________________________________________________________________________________________

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?