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

Filing 212

MOTION to Compel filed by Fusion Garage PTE. LTD. Motion Hearing set for 10/18/2011 10:00 AM in Courtroom 5, 4th Floor, San Jose before Magistrate Judge Paul Singh Grewal. Responses due by 9/23/2011. Replies due by 9/30/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Request for Judicial Notice, # 3 Request for Judicial Notice, Ex. 1, # 4 Affidavit Sohn, # 5 Exhibit Sohn Ex. 1, # 6 Exhibit Sohn Ex. 2)(Pennypacker, Evette) (Filed on 9/9/2011)

1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Claude M. Stern (Bar No. 96737)
2
[e-mail]
Evette D. Pennypacker (Bar No. 203515)
3
[e-mail]
Thomas R. Watson (Bar No. 227264)
4
[e-mail]
555 Twin Dolphin Dr., 5th floor
5 Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone]
6 Facsimile: [phone]
7

Joshua L. Sohn (Bar No. 250105)
[e-mail]
8
Sam S. Stake (Bar No. 257916)
[e-mail]
9 50 California Street, 22nd Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
10 Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
11
Attorneys for Defendant Fusion Garage PTE Ltd.
12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

16 TECHCRUNCH, INC., a Delaware
corporation, and CRUNCHPAD, INC., a
17 Delaware corporation,
18
19

Plaintiffs,
vs.

20 FUSION GARAGE PTE LTD., a Singapore
company,
21
Defendant.
22

CASE NO. C 09-cv-5812 RS (PSG)
DEFENDANT FUSION GARAGE PTE
LTD.’S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL
NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION
TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF
DOCUMENTS
Date: October 18, 2011
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Judge: Hon. Paul Singh Grewal
Location: San Jose, Courtroom 5, 4th Floor

23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. C 09-cv-5812 RS (PSG)
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE

1

Pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 201, Defendant Fusion Garage respectfully requests that the

2 Court take judicial notice of the following:
3

1.

Complaint in Jason Calacanis v. Techcrunch, No. CGC-10-505374 (San Francisco

4 Super. Ct. Nov. 12. 2010), attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
5
6

BASIS FOR REQUESTING JUDICIAL NOTICE
In ruling on Fusion Garage's Motion To Compel Production of Documents this Court may

7 take judicial notice of Exhibit 1 pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 201 because Exhibit 1 is a court filing
8 capable of accurate and ready determination. See Fed. R. Evid. 201; James v. Hubbard, Civil
9 Action No. 08-01857, 2010 WL 4901827 at *1 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 23, 2010) (stating that a court may
10 take judicial notice of court filings and other matters of public record).
11
12 DATED: September 9, 2011

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP

13
14
15
16

/s/ Evette D. Pennypacker
Evette D. Pennypacker
Attorneys for Defendant Fusion Garage PTE. Ltd.

By

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-1REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE

Case No. C 09-cv-5812 RS (PSG)