Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 588

ORDER re 587 Received Document. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 1/4/2010. (pjhlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/4/2010) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/5/2010: # 1 Certificate of Service) (nah, COURT STAFF).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ORACLE USA, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. SAP AG, et al., Defendants _______________________________/ On January 4, 2010, the court received a letter from a Michael Pulk, of Bryan, Texas. On the same date, the court had the letter docketed as a "Received" document. See Docket No. 587. The letter had been sent express mail on December 29, 2009, but because of the New Year's holiday and the court's unavailability during that period, the letter did not reach the court until January 4, 2010. The letter is not entirely clear, but it appears that Mr. Pulk is unhappy about some aspect of the conduct of discovery in this action, or more particularly, believes that some discovery practice of the parties is having a negative effect on his business. The court hereby directs the parties to meet and confer regarding this issue, and to file a status report within 30 days advising the court as to how they have resolved this problem. No. C 07-1658 PJH ORDER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 4, 2010 ______________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge