Bridgelux, Inc. v. Cree, Inc. et al

Filing 114

ORDER granting re 113 Stipulation Postponing Further Case Management Conference filed by Bridgelux, Inc. Further Case Management Conference set for 1/15/2009 02:30 PM. Joint CMC statement due 1/8/2009.. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamiltion on 12/4/08. (fj, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/5/2008)

Download PDF
1 Henry C. Bunsow (SBN 60707) K. T. Cherian (SBN 133967) 2 Robert F. Kramer (SBN 181706) Constance F. Ramos (SBN 203637) 3 Stephanie R. Johnson (SBN 242572) Ruhi Kumar (SBN 235945) 4 HOWREY LLP 525 Market Street, Suite 3600 5 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 848-4900 6 Facsimile: (415) 848-4999 Email: bunsowh@howrey.com 7 kramerR@howrey.com cheriank@howrey.com 8 ramosc@howrey.com johnsons@howrey.com 9 10 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant BRIDGELUX, INC. 11 Additional Attorneys Listed On Next Page 12 13 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 16 17 BRIDGELUX, INC., 18 19 20 vs. Plaintiff/CounterclaimDefendants, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. C 06-06495 PJH STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER POSTPONING FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Date: N/A Time: N/A Courtroom: N/A Judge: Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton CREE, Inc., and 21 TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY, 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. C 06-06495 PJH STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER POSTPOING FURTHER CMC DM_US:21636077_1 Defendants/CounterclaimPlaintiffs, 1 Matthew D. Powers (Bar No. 104795) Christopher J. Cox (Bar No. 151650) 2 Nicholas A. Brown (Bar No. 198210) 3 WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP Silicon Valley Office 4 201 Redwood Shores Parkway Redwood Shores, California 94065 5 Telephone: 650-802-3000 Facsimile: 650-802-3100 6 Email: matthew.powers@weil.com christopher.cox@weil.com 7 nicholas.brown@weil.com 8 9 David C. Radulescu (pro hac vice) Ryan R. Owens (pro hac vice) 10 Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 11 767 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 10153 12 Telephone: 212-310-8000 Facsimile: 212-310-8007 13 Email: david.radulescu@weil.com ryan.owens@weil.com 14 15 Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaim-Plaintiffs CREE, INC. AND TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. C 06-06495 PJH STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MAN. CONF. DM_US:21636077_1 -2- 1 Plaintiff and counterclaim-defendant Bridgelux, Inc. ("Bridgelux") and defendants and 2 counterclaim-plaintiffs Cree, Inc. and Trustees of Boston University (collectively "Cree") hereby 3 stipulate and respectfully request the Court continue the Case Management Conference currently 4 scheduled for December 11, 2008 at 2:30 p.m. The parties are continuing to make significant progress 5 and a further continuance will allow the parties to continue their settlement discussions without 6 unnecessarily consuming the Court's time. Consequently, the parties jointly propose that the dates for 7 filing a Joint Case Management Statement and conducting a Case Management Conference be 8 extended to January 8th and 15th, respectively, or another date that is convenient for the Court. 9 10 SO STIPULATED this 3rd day of December, 2008 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X (b) regarding signatures, I attest under penalty of By: /s/David C. Radulescu David C. Radulescu Attorneys for Defendants CREE, INC. and TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY By: /s/K.T. Cherian K.T. Cherian Attorneys for Plaintiff BRIDGELUX, INC. 20 perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from K.T. Cherian and David 21 C. Radulescu. 22 23 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED UNIT ED 24 25 12/4/08 26 DATED: ____________ 27 28 Case No. C 06-06495 PJH STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MAN. CONF. DM_US:21636077_1 S S DISTRICT TE C TA N F D IS T IC T O R A -3- ER C LI FO ________________________________ Phyllis J. Hamilton milton United States District Court Phyllis J. Ha Judge Judge R NIA I ORD T IS SO ERED RT U O NO RT H

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?