IO Group, Inc. v. Veoh Networks, Inc.

Filing 12

STIPULATION AND ORDER for Extension of Time for Defendant Veoh Networks, Inc. to Respond to Plaintiff's Motion to Consolidate. Defendant's response due by 9/25/2006. Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on 9/14/06. (hrllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/14/2006)

IO Group, Inc. v. Veoh Networks, Inc.

Doc. 12

Case 5:06-cv-03926-HRL

Document 12

Filed 09/14/2006

Page 1 of 3

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
THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

Dean A. Morehous (CA Bar No. 111841) [e-mail] THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP 101 Second Street Suite 1800 *E-FILED ON 9/14/06* San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Michael S. Elkin (pro hac vice pending) [e-mail] Paul M. Fakler (pro hac vice pending) [e-mail] THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP 875 Third Avenue New York, New York 10022 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Defendant VEOH NETWORKS, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

IO GROUP, INC., a California Corporation Plaintiff, v. VEOH NETWORKS, Inc., a California Corporation, Defendant.

Case No.: C06-3926 (HRL) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT VEOH NETWORKS, INC. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2 and 7-2, Plaintiff IO Group, Inc. ("Plaintiff") and Defendant VEOH Networks, Inc. ("Defendant"), hereby stipulate that Defendant shall have an extension of time, until Monday, September 25, 2006, to file its Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Consolidate. This extension will have no effect on any of the other dates currently scheduled in this action. -1STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT VEOH NETWORKS, INC. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE C-06-3926 (HRL)

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 5:06-cv-03926-HRL

Document 12

Filed 09/14/2006

Page 2 of 3

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
THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

This brief extension of time was necessitated by the very recent retention of Thelen Reid & Priest by defendant and the subsequent substitution of counsel. One previous extension has been sought, stipulated to and ordered in this matter, extending defendant's time to answer plaintiff's complaint until Monday, September 25, 2006. SO STIPULATED. Dated: September 12, 2006 THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP

/s/ Dean A. Morehous Dean A. Morehous Michael S. Elkin (pro hac vice pending) Paul M. Fakler (pro hac vice pending) Attorneys for Defendant VEOH NETWORKS, INC. Dated: September 12, 2006 THE LAW FIRM OF GILL SPERLEIN Gill Sperlein /s/ Gill Sperlein GILL SPERLEIN Attorneys for Plaintiff IO GROUP, INC. I, Dean A. Morehous, hereby attest, pursuant to N.D. Cal. General Order No. 45, that the concurrence to the filing of this document has been obtained from each signatory hereto. /s/ Dean A. Morehous Dean A. Morehous

-2STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT VEOH NETWORKS, INC. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE C-06-3926 (HRL)

Case 5:06-cv-03926-HRL

Document 12

Filed 09/14/2006

Page 3 of 3

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
THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. September 14, 2006 Dated: ______________________

HONORABLE HOWARD R. LLOYD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

-3STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT VEOH NETWORKS, INC. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE C-06-3926 (HRL)