NanoeXa Corporation v. The University of Chicago et al

Filing 57

ORDER re 56 GRANTING AS MODIFIED STIPULATION REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE AS TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT. The briefing schedule for the Motion to Dismiss the Initial Complaint, as set out in 53 , is VACATED. Signed by Judge Koh on 9/8/2010. (lhklc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/8/2010)

NanoeXa Corporation v. The University of Chicago et al

Doc. 57

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

CAROLINE MCINTYRE, SBN 159005, [e-mail] GRACE Y. PARK, SBN 239928, [e-mail] BERGESON, LLP 303 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 500 San Jose, CA 95110-2712 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] DANIEL P. ALBERS (admitted pro hac vice) [e-mail] MARK A. HAGEDORN (admitted pro hac vice) [e-mail] BARNES & THORNBURG LLP One North Wacker Drive, Suite 4400 Chicago, IL 60606-2833 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Defendants THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO and UCHICAGO ARGONNE LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION NANOEXA CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff, vs. THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, an Illinois Corporation; UCHICAGO ARGONNE LLC, an Illinois limited liability company, Defendants. Case No. CV 10-02631 LHK STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Judge: Hon. Lucy H. Koh Ctrm: 4, 5th Fl. Complaint Filed: June 15, 2010

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. CV 10-02631 LHK
Dockets.Justia.com

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

TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: WHEREAS, Plaintiff Nanoexa Corporation ("Plaintiff") filed a Complaint For Declaratory Relief And Breach Of Contract against Defendants The University of Chicago and UChicago Argonne LLC ("Defendants") on June 15, 2010 (the "Complaint"); WHEREAS, Defendants filed a Motion To Dismiss Or Alternatively To Transfer Venue (the "Motion to Dismiss") scheduled for hearing on October 21, 2010; WHEREAS, during a hearing on August 26, 2010, the parties agreed to expedite the briefing schedule, and the Court expedited the briefing schedule, for the Motion to Dismiss so that Plaintiff's opposition would be due on September 16, 2010, and Defendants' reply would be due on September 23, 2010; WHEREAS, on August 27, 2010, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint For Declaratory Judgment, Breach Of Contract, And Patent Misuse (the "First Amended Complaint"); WHEREAS, Defendants' response to the First Amended Complaint is currently due September 13, 2010; WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants have agreed to keep the October 21, 2010 hearing date for Defendants' response to the First Amended Complaint, and Defendants have confirmed with the Court that they may do so; WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants agree that the time for Plaintiff to file its opposition to Defendants' responsive motion and for Defendants to file their reply will be pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff and Defendants, subject to the approval of the Court, that: 1. The expedited briefing schedule for the Motion to Dismiss the Complaint is vacated; 2. Defendants will file their response to the First Amended Complaint by September 13, 2010;

1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. CV 10-02631 LHK

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

3.

The hearing on any motion Defendants file in response to the First Amended Complaint will take place on October 21, 2010 at 1:30 p.m., preceding the previously scheduled status conference.

4.

Plaintiff will file any opposition to any motion responding to the First Amended Complaint by September 30, 2010; September 24, 2010,

5.

Defendants will file any reply to any motion responding to the First Amended Complaint by October 7, 2010. October 1, 2010.

The filer attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories.

Dated: September 7, 2010

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

BERGESON, LLP

By:

/s/ Caroline McIntyre

Attorneys for Defendants THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO and UCHICAGO ARGONNE LLC

Dated: September 7, 2010

KIRIN LAW GROUP, P.C.

By:

/s/ Q. Huy Do, Esq.

Attorneys for Plaintiff NANOEXA CORPORATION

2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. CV 10-02631 LHK

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 STIPULATION,AND AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT, IT IS SO IT IS SO ORDERED. ORDERED. September 8, 2010 DATED: ___________________ _____________________________________ Lucy H. Koh UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. CV 10-02631 LHK