Coupons, Inc. v. Stottlemire

Filing 63

ORDER re #62 Stipulation to Continue Hearing; STIPULATION AND ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on 4/3/08. (hrllc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/3/2008)

Download PDF
Coupons, Inc. v. Stottlemire Doc. 63 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 SAMUELSON LAW, TECHNOLOGY & PUBLIC POLICY CLINIC JASON M. SCHULTZ (SBN 212600) JENNIFER A. LYNCH (SBN 240701) DOMENIC IPPOLITO (Application for Student Practice Pending) HARI O'CONNELL (Application for Student Practice Pending) UC Berkeley Law School 389 Simon Hall Berkeley, CA 94720 Telephone: (510) 642-7515 Facsimile: (510) 643-4625 jlynch@law.berkeley.edu Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION COUPONS, INC., Plaintiff, v. JOHN STOTTLEMIRE and DOES 1-10, Defendants. *E-filed 4/3/08* Case No. 5:07-CV-03457 HRL STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS TO MAY 13, 2008 Date: May 6, 2008 [N.D. Cal. Local Rule 6-2] 1 Case No. 5:07-CV-03457 HRL STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS TO MAY 13, 2008 Dockets.Justia.com 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 Amicus Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation, Plaintiff Coupons, Inc., and Defendant John Stottlemire hereby file this Stipulation requesting the Court continue the hearing date on Defendant John Stottlemire's Motion to Dismiss, currently scheduled by the Court for May 6, 2008, by one week to May 13, 2008. WHEREAS, on December 27, 2007, Plaintiff Coupons, Inc. filed its Second Amended Complaint; WHEREAS, on February 26, 2008, Defendant Stottlemire filed a Motion to Dismiss For Failure to State a Claim On Which Relief Can Be Granted; WHEREAS, on March 25, 2008, Amicus Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed Motions for Leave to File an Amicus Curiae Brief and for Leave to Appear and Participate in Oral Argument in support of Defendant's Motion. WHEREAS, on March 31, 2008, the Court granted EFF's two motions and ordered the brief to be filed; WHEREAS, on March 31, 2008, the Court signed a stipulation and order allowing Plaintiff to file its Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss on April 4, 2008, and allowing Defendant to file his Reply on April 11, 2008, and moving the hearing date on the Motion to May 6, 2008; WHEREAS, as stated in the accompanying Declaration of Jennifer Lynch, EFF's attorneys, Jennifer Lynch and Jason Schultz, are both scheduled to attend a conference out of town during the week of May 5, 2008; // // // // // // // // 2 Case No. 5:07-CV-03457 HRL STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS TO MAY 13, 2008 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 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto that the hearing date on the Motion to Dismiss be continued to May 13, 2008. DATED: April 3, 2008 By: /s/ Jennifer A. Lynch Jennifer A. Lynch Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic at U.C. Berkeley Law School Attorney for Amicus Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation (Supervising Attorney) By: /s/ Carly Alameda Carly Alameda Farella Braun & Martel Attorneys for Plaintiff COUPONS, INC. By: /s/ John Stottlemire John Stottlemire Defendant, pro se ORDER Good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is CONTINUED to May 13, 2008 at 10:00 am (Courtroom 2, Fifth Floor of United States District Court in San Jose, California). PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 4/3 DATED: ___________, 2008 By: The Honorable Howard R. Lloyd United States Magistrate Judge 3 Case No. 5:07-CV-03457 HRL STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS TO MAY 13, 2008

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?