Synnex Corporation v. Wattles

Filing 130

ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, Set/Reset Deadlines as to 124 MOTION for Summary Judgment CORRECTED VERSION - EXHIBITS 1-10 ARE INCLUDED IN DKT 107. Motion for Summary Judgment Hearing is CONTINUED to 10/30/2012 02:00 PM in Courtroom 5, 2nd Floor, Oakland before Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 10/15/12. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/15/2012)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6

SYNNEX CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,

7
8
9
10

Case No.: C-11-01496-YGR
ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

vs.
MARK J. WATTLES,
Defendant.

11

Northern District of California

United States District Court

12
13
14
15
16

The Court has received the parties’ Joint Stipulation to Continue Motion for Summary
Judgment. (Dkt. No. 129.) The Court notes that despite the parties’ stipulation to this continuance, it
was improper for the parties to have delayed until the Friday before the hearing date to file their
request with the Court.
In light of the Stipulation, the Court will continue the hearing on the summary judgment

17

motion until October 30, 2012 at 2:00 p.m. The parties are reminded that their Joint Pretrial

18

Statement is due on November 2, 2012 and the Pretrial Conference is scheduled for November 16,

19

2012. Trial is scheduled for December 10, 2012. The Court will not extend any trial deadlines in

20

light of the re-set summary judgment hearing date. The parties are expected to comply with all trial

21

deadlines and requirements as set forth in the Court’s trial standing order.

22

The Court further notes that both parties were ordered to comply with the Civil Local Rules

23

regarding authentication of evidence in support of or in opposition to the summary judgment motion.

24

(Dkt. No. 125.) Plaintiff’s counsel filed a declaration regarding service of its separate statement, but

25

did not authenticate any of its evidence in support of the summary judgment motion. (Dkt. No. 126.)

26

Defendant’s counsel filed a declaration in response to the Court’s Order. (Dkt. No. 128.) Plaintiff is

27

hereby ORDERED to file a declaration authenticating its evidence in compliance with Civ. L.R. 7-5 by

28

Friday, October 19, 2012 at 12:00 p.m.

1

This Order terminates Dkt. No. 129.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3
4

Dated: October 15, 2012
_______________________________________

5

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11

Northern District of California

United States District Court

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

2