Acticon Technologies LLC v. Pretec Electronics Corporation et al

Filing 126

ORDER EXCUSING ATTENDANCE AT SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE. (rslc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/15/2009)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA *E-Filed 6/15/09* United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California ACTICON TECHNOLOGIES, LLC Plaintiff, v. PRETEC ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, a dissolved California corporation; PTI GLOBAL, INC, a California corporation; CHIU FENG CHEN, an individual; GORDON YU, an individual; GRACE YU, an individual; KUEI LU, an individual; and DOES 1 through 20, Defendants. _____________________________________/ No. 5:07 CV 4507 JF 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER EXCUSING ATTENDANCE AT SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE TO ALL PARTIES AND COUNSEL OF RECORD: By written requested dated June 8, 2009, Defendants Kuei Lu and Chiu Feng Chen, by and through their counsel, Richard C.J. Wahng, requested that they be excused from personally appearing at the settlement conference originally scheduled for June 19, 2009, which the Court continued to June 25, 2009. No opposition was filed by any party. Upon consideration of the request, the Court finds good cause for excusing personal attendance. Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that the individual defendants be available by telephone from 9:30 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time until further notice on June 25, 2009. If the court concludes that the absence of the individual defendants is interfering with the settlement conference, the Court may continue the settlement conference and may order personal attendance by each party. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Dated: 6/15/09 RICHARD SEEBORG United States Magistrate Judge IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?