Interserve, Inc. et al v. Fusion Garage PTE. LTD
Filing
230
MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney Quinn Emanuel's Motion to Withdraw as Counsel for Fusion Garage PTE. LTD. filed by Fusion Garage PTE. LTD. Motion Hearing set for 1/19/2012 01:30 PM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Richard Seeborg. Responses due by 12/27/2011. Replies due by 1/3/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Claude M. Stern, # 2 Proposed Order)(Stern, Claude) (Filed on 12/13/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
11
12
TECHCRUNCH, INC., a Delaware
13 corporation, and CRUNCHPAD, INC., a
Delaware corporation,
14
Plaintiffs,
15
vs.
16
FUSION GARAGE PTE. LTD., a Singapore
17 company,
18
Defendant.
19
20
CASE NO. C 09-cv-5812 RS (PSG)
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN LLP’S MOTION TO
WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD
FOR DEFENDANT FUSION GARAGE
PTE. LTD.
Date: January 19, 2012
Time: 1:30 p.m.
Judge: Hon. Richard Seeborg
Location: San Francisco, Courtroom 3 - 17th
Floor
The motion of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP (“Quinn Emanuel”) to withdraw
21 as counsel of record for Fusion Garage PTE. Ltd. (“Fusion Garage”) came on regularly for hearing
22 on January 19, 2012 at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 3 of the above-entitled Court, the Honorable
23 Richard Seeborg presiding. All parties were given notice of the hearing.
24
Having considered all papers filed herein and the oral argument of counsel, and good cause
25 appearing: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Quinn Emanuel’s Motion to Withdraw as Counsel for
26 Fusion Garage is hereby GRANTED.
27
28
Case No. C 09-cv-5812 RS (PSG)
ORDER RE QUINN EMANUEL’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD
1 DATED: January ___, 2012
2
3
4
HON. RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. C 09-cv-5812 RS (PSG)
-1ORDER RE QUINN EMANUEL’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD
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?