Interserve, Inc. et al v. Fusion Garage PTE. LTD

Filing 11

MOTION for Discovery Plaintiffs' Motion to Allow Discovery Before Rule 26 Conference on an Expedited Basis [L.R. 6-3(a)] filed by CrunchPad, Inc., Interserve, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Bloch, David) (Filed on 12/28/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
101 California Street San Francisco, CA 94111-5894

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION INTERSERVE, INC. dba TECHCRUNCH, a ) Delaware corporation, and CRUNCHPAD, ) INC., a Delaware corporation, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) FUSION GARAGE PTE. LTD., a Singapore ) company, ) Defendant. ) ) Case No. C 09 5812 JW (PVT) [proposed] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO ALLOW DISCOVERY BEFORE RULE 26 CONFERENCE ON AN EXPEDITED BASIS [L.R. 6-3(a)]

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Winston & Strawn LLP

The Court has considered Plaintiffs' Motion to Allow Discovery Before Rule 26 Conference on an Expedited Basis an Defendant's response thereto. The Court finds that Plaintiffs have good cause to seek discovery before the Rule 26 conference in this case in order to support a possible request for preliminary relief, as set forth in Plaintiffs' motion papers and supporting materials, and further that Defendant will not be prejudiced by the early discovery proposed to be propounded by Plaintiffs. Therefore, for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. 2. Discovery may commence as of the date of this Order; and Defendant shall respond to Plaintiffs' initial requests for discovery, attached to

Plaintiffs' motion, on or before January 27, 2010. Dated: IT IS SO ORDERED. Hon. Patricia V. Trumbull 1

SF:270330.1

[PROPOSED] ORDER ON MOTION FOR EXPEDITED DISCOVERY