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

Filing 208

MOTION to Strike 207 Amended Answer to Complaint filed by CrunchPad, Inc., Interserve, Inc.. Motion Hearing set for 6/9/2011 01:30 PM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Richard Seeborg. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 2 Proposed Order)(Scherb, Matthew) (Filed on 4/29/2011)

1

6

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
Andrew P. Bridges (SBN: 122761)
[e-mail]
David S. Bloch (SBN: 184530)
[e-mail]
Matthew A. Scherb (SBN: 237461)
[e-mail]
101 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-5802
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

7

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

2
3
4
5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
101 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-5802

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

Winston & Strawn LLP

8

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11

TECHCRUNCH, INC. (f/k/a INTERSERVE,
INC.), and CRUNCHPAD, INC.,

12
Plaintiffs,
13

Case No. C 09-cv-05812 RS (PSG)
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO STRIKE
FUSION GARAGE’S AMENDED ANSWER

vs.
14
15
16

FUSION GARAGE PTE. LTD., a Singapore
Company,
Defendant.

Date: June 9, 2011
Time: 1:30 P.M.
Place: Courtroom 3, 17th Floor
Hon. Richard Seeborg

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO STRIKE AMENDED ANSWER
(CASE NO. 3:09-CV-05812-RS (PSG)

1
2
3

The Court has considered Plaintiffs’ Motion To Strike Fusion Garage’s Amended Answer and
grants it. The Court strikes Fusion Garage’s Amended Answer.
The Court further clarifies that Fusion Garage has dismissed its counterclaim. Fusion

4

Garage’s Amended Answer omitted the counterclaim and Fusion Garage did not oppose Plaintiffs’

5

motion to dismiss the counterclaim by the opposition deadline.

6
7
8

Dated: ____________

___________________________________
Hon. Richard Seeborg
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9

101 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-5802

Winston & Strawn LLP

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO STRIKE AMENDED ANSWER
(CASE NO. 3:09-CV-05812-RS (PSG)