Chi et al v. Direct Equities LLP et al

Filing 67

STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION OF ENTRUST ADMINISTRATION, INC. TO VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND SET ASIDE DEFAULT. Signed by Judge Whyte on 7/28/06. (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/28/2006)

Download PDF
Case 5:05-cv-01594-RMW Document 67 Filed 07/28/2006 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW PALO A L T O MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP CHRISTOPHER L. WANGER (Bar No. CA 164751) RYAN S. HILBERT (Bar No. CA 210549) 1001 Page Mill Road, Building 2 Palo Alto, CA 94304-1006 Telephone: (650) 812-1300 Facsimile: (650) 213-0260 Attorneys for Defendant, ENTRUST ADMINISTRATION, INC. * E-filed 7/28/06 * UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION HAIBO CHI, DAFENG CHEN, RUILING QIN, TYSON LEE, LIMING MA, TAO JIN, WEI YUAN, XIN ZHOU, YUE XU, BIAO ZHANG, LI ZHANG, RAN XIAO, JEFF ZHU, LINDI WANT, EDMOND CHEN, ZHEN HAO, XUEPU ZHAO, SHU-JANE TAN, HAIYING WANG, NING XU, Plaintiffs, Vs. DIRECT EQUITIES, LLP, DIRECT EQUITIES, INC. (D.B.A. NATIONWIDE PROPERTIES), CRAIG N. KIRT, THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF CRAIG N. KIRT, INGRID KIRT, STEVE M. SCOTT, KELLY KINGSLAND, PAUL KASPUTIS, ENTRUST ADMINISTRATION, INC., DAVID WINTER, AND DOES 1-50, Defendants. Case No. C05-01594 RMW STIPULATION AND XXXXXXXXXX [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MOTION OF ENTRUST ADMINISTRATION, INC. TO VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND SET ASIDE DEFAULT WHEREAS, the default of Defendant ENTRUST ADMINISTRATION, INC. ("Entrust") was entered in this matter on June 30, 2005; WHEREAS, a default judgment in the total amount of two hundred thirty thousand dollars ($230,000) was entered against Entrust on January 23, 2006; WHEREAS, Entrust has filed a motion to set aside its default and vacate the judgment STIPULATED ORDER VACATING DEFAULT JUDGMENT CASE NO. C05-01594 RMW Case 5:05-cv-01594-RMW Document 67 Filed 07/28/2006 Page 2 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW PALO A L T O against it, which motion is scheduled to be heard on August 18, 2006; and WHEREAS, Plaintiffs, HAIBO CHI, DAFENG CHEN, RUILING QIN, TYSON LEE, LIMING MA, TAO JIN, WEI YUAN, XIN ZHOU, YUE XU, BIAO ZHANG, LI ZHANG, RAN XIAO, JEFF ZHU, LINDI WANT, EDMOND CHEN, ZHEN HAO, XUEPU ZHAO, SHU-JANE TAN, HAIYING WANG, and NING XU do not oppose Entrust's motion. WHEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and among the parties hereto through their respective counsel that the default judgment entered against Entrust should be vacated and Entrust's default set aside. Dated: July 25, 2006 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP By: /s/ Christopher L. Wanger Christopher L. Wanger Attorneys for Defendant, ENTRUST ADMINISTRATION, INC. Dated: July 25, 2006 SCHEIN & CAI LLP By: /s/ James Cai James Cai Attorneys for Plaintiffs, HAIBO CHI, DAFENG CHEN, RUILING QIN, TYSON LEE, LIMING MA, TAO JIN, WEI YUAN, XIN ZHOU, YUE XU, BIAO ZHANG, LI ZHANG, RAN XIAO, JEFF ZHU, LINDI WANT, EDMOND CHEN, ZHEN HAO, XUEPU ZHAO, SHU-JANE TAN, HAIYING WANG, NING XU Filer's Attestation: Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B) regarding signatures, Christopher L. Wanger hereby attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained. ORDER Pursuant to the foregoing stipulation and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that that the default judgment entered against Entrust shall be vacated and Entrust's default shall be set aside. Entrust shall answer, move or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint in this matter within twenty (20) days of the date below. Dated: ____________, 2006 7/28 ________________________________________ Honorable Ronald M. Whyte United States District Judge 2 STIPULATED ORDER VACATING DEFAULT JUDGMENT CASE NO. C05-01594 RMW

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?