Oracle Corporation et al v. ORG Structure Innovations LLC et al

Filing 114

STIPULATION AND ORDER re (80 in 4:12-cv-00348-SBA, 80 in 4:12-cv-00348-SBA) Stipulation and Order, Case Referred to Private ADR. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 5/11/12. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/14/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 K.T. Cherian (Cal. Bar No. 133967) Clayton C. James (admitted pro hac vice) Srecko Vidmar (Cal. Bar No. 241120) Maren J. Clouse (Cal. Bar No. 228726) HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP Four Embarcadero Center, 22nd Floor San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 374-2300 Facsimile: (415) 374-2499 Peter J. O’Rourke (Cal. Bar No. 227164) ORACLE CORPORATION 500 Oracle Parkway, MS 5OP7 Redwood Shores, California 94065 Telephone: (650) 506-5200 Facsimile: (650) 506-7114 9 10 Attorneys for ORACLE CORPORATION and ORACLE AMERICA, INC. 11 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 OAKLAND DIVISION 15 16 ORACLE CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, and ORACLE AMERICA, INC., a Delaware corporation, 17 Plaintiffs, 18 19 20 Case No. 11-cv-03549-SBA SECOND REVISED STIPULATION AND ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS v. ORG STRUCTURE INNOVATIONS LLC, a Texas limited liability company, and PAUL MORINVILLE, an individual resident of Indiana, Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong 21 Defendants. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SECOND REVISED STIP. AND ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS CASE NO. 11-cv-03549-SBA 1 Case No. 12-cv-00297-SBA PAUL V. MORINVILLE and ORG STRUCTURE INNOVATIONS LLC, 2 Plaintiffs, 3 v. 4 5 ORACLE CORPORATION and ORACLE AMERICA, INC., 6 Defendants. 7 8 9 10 Case No. 12-cv-00348-SBA ORG STRUCTURE INNOVATIONS LLC, 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 14 ORACLE CORPORATION AMERICA, INC., 15 and ORACLE Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 SECOND REVISED STIP. AND ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS CASE NO. 11-cv-03549-SBA 1 2 Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the following stipulation pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16-8 and ADR Local Rule 3-5: 3 The parties have previously agreed to private mediation and previously informed the Court 4 that they planned to hold the mediation with mediator Edward A. Infante, United States Magistrate 5 Judge (Ret.), of JAMS on June 6, 2012. The Court signed the parties’ stipulated order to that effect 6 on March 27, 2012 (Dkt. No. 100). Oracle has become aware of a conflict with respect to use of 7 Judge Infante. The parties have agreed to reschedule the mediation with mediator Randall W. 8 Wulff, Esq. of Wulff Quinby Sochynsky, who can mediate the case in late August. The parties 9 attach a proposed Order setting forth their agreed upon mediation provider and the date by which 10 mediation shall be completed. 11 12 IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED. 13 Dated: May 10, 2012 14 HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP By: /s/ Maren J. Clouse Maren J. Clouse 15 Attorneys for ORACLE CORPORATION and ORACLE AMERICA, INC. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Dated: May 10, 2012 FARNEY DANIELS LLP By: /s/ Steven R. Daniels Steven R. Daniels 800 South Austin Avenue, Suite 200 Georgetown, Texas 78626 Attorneys for ORG STRUCTURE INNOVATIONS LLC and PAUL MORINVILLE I, Maren J. Clouse, attest that Steven R. Daniels has read and approved this Stipulation and Proposed Order Selecting ADR Process and consents to its filing in this action. 27 28 1 SECOND REVISED STIP. AND ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS CASE NO. 11-cv-03549-SBA 1 2 ORDER Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is referred to private 3 mediation. The parties agree to hold the mediation by no later than August 31, 2012 with Randall 4 W. Wulff, Esq. of Wulff Quinby Sochynsky. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 DATED: _5/11/12 8 ____________________________________________ 9 THE HONORABLE SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 SECOND REVISED STIP. AND ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS CASE NO. 11-cv-03549-SBA

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?