Fuzzysharp Technologies Incorporated v. Intel Corporation

Filing 90

ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting 88 Motion for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal by January 27, 2014. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/23/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 FUZZYSHARP TECHNOLOGIES INC., Plaintiff, 7 8 9 10 vs. Case No.: 12-CV-04413 YGR ORDER GRANTING MOTION OF PLAINTIFF FUZZYSHARP TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL INTEL CORPORATION, Defendant. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 On January 13, 2014, Plaintiff Fuzzysharp Technologies, Inc. filed its Motion for Extension 12 of Time to File Notice of Appeal. (Dkt. No. 88.) Defendant Intel Corporation filed its opposition 13 to the motion. (Dkt. No. 89.) 14 Having carefully considered the papers submitted in support and in opposition, the Court 15 hereby GRANTS the Motion for Extension of Time. The Court has discretion, under Rule 16 4(a)(5)(A)(ii), to grant an extension of time to file a notice of appeal upon a showing of excusable 17 neglect. See Pioneer Inv. Services Co. v. Brunswick Associates Ltd. Partnership, 507 U.S. 380 18 (1993). Plaintiff has offered evidence to support his argument that his failure to file a notice of 19 appeal by the deadline of Friday, January 10, 2014, was due to his excusable neglect. Intel 20 concedes that there is no real danger of prejudice or impact on the proceedings due to Plaintiff 21 missing the deadline by not filing on January 10. 22 Thus the request for extension is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall file any Notice of Appeal no 23 later than January 27, 2014. 24 This Order terminates Docket No. 88. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 27 28 Date: January 23, 2014 _______________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

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?