Atari Interactive, Inc. v. Nestle, SA et al
Filing
20
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 18 Stipulation re Extension of Time filed by Nestle USA, Inc., Atari Interactive, Inc.. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 9/11/2017. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/11/2017)
6
RT
8
n
onne Go
Judge Yv
NO
7
9
ER
zalez Rog
9/11/2017
H
Dale J. Giali (SBN 150382)
350 South Grand Avenue, 25th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1503
Telephone: (213) 229-9500
Facsimile: (213) 625-0248
dgiali@mayerbrown.com
TED
GRAN
N
R NIA
5
ers
FO
4
LI
3
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
A
A. John P. Mancini
(pro hac vice application to be filed)
1221 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020
Telephone: (212) 506-2500
Facsimile: (212) 262-1910
jmancini@mayerbrown.com
UNIT
ED
2
S
MAYER BROWN LLP
RT
U
O
1
C
10
F
D IS T IC T O
R
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Counsel for Defendant Nestlé USA, Inc.
14
ATARI INTERACTIVE, INC.,
15
Plaintiff,
16
17
v.
Case No. 4:17-cv-04803-YGR
STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF
TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
NESTLÉ, SA; NESTLÉ UK LTD; and
NESTLÉ USA, INC.,
18
Defendant.
Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION TO EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; CASE NO. 4:17-CV-04803-YGR
1
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-1(a), Plaintiff Atari Interactive, Inc. (Plaintiff) and
2
Defendants Nestlé USA, Inc., collectively, “the parties,” by and through their respective counsel
3
of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
4
WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed its complaint on August 17, 2017;
5
WHEREAS, Plaintiff served Nestlé USA, Inc. on August 22, 2017 (see ECF No. 15);
6
WHEREAS, based on the August 22 service, Nestlé USA, Inc. currently has until
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
September 12, 2017 to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s complaint;
WHEREAS, Nestlé USA, Inc. has requested and Plaintiff has consented to an additional
45 days to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s complaint;
WHEREAS, this extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s
complaint will not alter the date of any event or deadline already fixed by Court order;
WHEREAS, the parties agree that neither will be prejudiced by the agreed-upon
extension, nor will this litigation be unreasonably delayed;
14
WHEREAS, this is the first time modification any of the parties has sought in this matter;
15
WHEREAS, the parties are currently engaged in discussions over whether proper service
16
of process has been effected upon defendants Nestlé, SA and Nestlé UK LTD; and
17
WHEREAS, regardless of the outcome of those discussions, the parties agree that Nestlé
18
UK and Nestlé S.A. will not be required to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s complaint
19
earlier than Nestlé USA, Inc., subject to later-filed stipulation;
20
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties,
21
through their respective counsel, that Nestlé USA, Inc. shall answer or otherwise respond to
22
Plaintiff’s complaint by October 27, 2017.
23
24
SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE
25
26
27
28
1
STIPULATION TO EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; CASE NO. 4:17-CV-04803-YGR
Respectfully Submitted,
1
2
3
Dated: September 7, 2017
MAYER BROWN LLP
A. John P. Mancini
Dale J. Giali
4
5
6
7
By: /s/ Dale J. Giali
Dale J. Giali
8
Counsel for Defendant Nestlé USA, Inc.
9
10
11
Dated: September 7, 2017
BROWNE GEORGE ROSS LLP,
12
By: /s/ Keith J. Wesley
Keith J. Wesley
13
14
Counsel for Plaintiff
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
STIPULATION TO EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; CASE NO. 4:17-CV-04803-YGR
1
2
3
ATTESTATION
I, Dale J. Giali, hereby attest, pursuant to Civil Local. Rule 5-1(i)(3), that
concurrence to the filing of this document has been obtained from each signatory.
4
5
By:
/s/ Dale J. Giali
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION TO EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; CASE NO. 4:17-CV-04803-YGR
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?