San Francisco Technology, Inc. v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Filing 82

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: 81 TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 02/17/2010.(rslc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Daniel H. Fingerman (SBN 229683) MOUNT & STOELKER, P.C. River Park Tower 333 W. San Carlos Street, Suite 1650 San Jose, CA 95110 Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff San Francisco Technology, Inc. Daralyn J. Durie (SBN 169825) Ryan M. Kent (SBN 220441) DURIE TANGRI LLP 217 Leidesdorff Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Pavestone Company LP

*E-Filed 02/17/2010*

UNTIED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION SAN FRANCISCO TECHNOLOGY INC., Plaintiff, v.
ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED, THE

Case No. 5:09 cv-06083 RS STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

BRITA PRODUCTS COMPANY, DELTA FAUCET COMPANY, EVANS MANUFACTURING, INC., THE EVERCARE COMPANY, GRAPHIC PACKAGING INTERNATIONAL INC., MAGNUM RESEARCH INC., PAVESTONE COMPANY LP, THE PROCTOR & GAMBLE COMPANY, S.C. JOHNSON & SON INC., SPECTRUM BRANDS INC., SUPER SWIM CORP., UNILOCK INC., WEST COAST CHAIN MFG. CO., Defendants.

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT

CASE NO. 5:09-cv-06083 RS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Pursuant to Local Rule 6-1 (a), Plaintiff San Francisco Technology Inc. stipulates and agrees that Defendant Pavestone Company LP ("Pavestone") will have until March 1, 2010, to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint filed by Plaintiff. This change will not alter the date of any event or any deadline already fixed by Court order. THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties appearing below through their undersigned respective attorneys, that Pavestone will have until March 1, 2010, to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint.

Dated: February 16, 2010

DURIE TANGRI LLP

By:

/s/ Ryan M. Kent RYAN M. KENT Attorneys for Defendant Pavestone Company LP

MOUNT & STOELKER, P.C. By: /s/ Daniel H. Fingerman
DANIEL H. FINGERMAN

Attorneys for Plaintiff San Francisco Technology, Inc. FILER'S ATTESTATION Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B) regarding signatures, I, Ryan M. Kent, attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained. /s/ Ryan M. Kent RYAN M. KENT

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT

CASE NO. 5:09-cv-06083 RS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: February _____, 2010 17 HON. RICHARD SEEBORG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT

CASE NO. 5:09-cv-06083 RS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 X

PROOF OF SERVICE I am employed in the City of San Francisco, County San Francisco, State of California, I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action. My business address is 217 Leidesdorff Street, San Francisco, CA 94111. On February 16, 2010, I caused copies of the attached STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT to be served on: All parties with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system. In addition, I caused a copy of the attached STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT to be served on the following person(s) in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelope and addressed as follows: Mark B. Garred Stetina Brunda Garred & Brucker 75 Enterprise, Suite 250 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 [phone] (BY FIRST CLASS MAIL) I caused each such envelope to the addressee(s) noted above, with postage thereon fully prepaid, to be placed in the United States mail in San Francisco, California. I am readily familiar with the practice of Durie Tangri LLP for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing, said practice being that in the ordinary course of business mail is deposited in the United States Postal Service the same date as it is placed for collection. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on February 16, 2010, at San Francisco, California.

/s/ Colette Aragon Colette Aragon

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT

CASE NO. 5:09-cv-06083 RS