Solannex, Inc. v. MiaSole, Inc.

Filing 113

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO AMEND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER re 112 Stipulation filed by Solannex, Inc. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on April 3, 2012. (psglc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/3/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Gregory S. Tamkin (State Bar No. 175009)
Case Collard (State Bar No. 245834)
DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP
1400 Wewatta Street, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80202-5549
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff Solannex, Inc.

Claude M. Stern (State Bar No. 96737)
Ray Zado (State Bar No. 208501)
Anna T. Neill (State Bar No. 270858)
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor
Redwood Shores, California 94065-2139
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant MiaSolé, Inc.

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12
13

Case No. 11-cv-00171 PSG
ORDER GRANTING
STIPULATED MOTION FOR AMENDED
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

SOLANNEX, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.

United States Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal

14
MIASOLÉ, INC.,
15
Defendant.

16
17

Counsel for Plaintiff Solannex, Inc. (“Solannex”) has a personal conflict with the current

18

trial date and has conferred with Defendant MiaSolé, Inc. (“MiaSolé, Inc.”) regarding an

19

amendment to the Case Management Order to extend the trial date. The parties ultimately agreed

20

to the dates as listed below.

21

Solannex initially sought a five week extension, but counsel for MiaSolé was not available

22

at that time. MiaSolé indicate a 14 week delay with a trial date of December 3, 2012 would be

23

acceptable; Solannex agreed.1

24
25
26
27
28

1 MiaSolé wishes to emphasize that—as discussed in its Response to Administrative Motion to Consider Whether
Cases Should Be Related (E.C.F. No. 109)—it intends to move for the Court to consolidate or coordinate this case with
the recently filed 12-cv-00832-PSG case (between the same parties on related patents and the same technology).
Should the consolidation or coordination be ordered MiaSolé would request that the trial on both cases be either the
same (if there is consolidation) or coordinated, and likely rescheduled to some time in late 2013 (to accommodate
compliance with local patent rules, including time for a new Markman proceeding and discovery in the more recently
filed case). Nothing in this stipulation prejudices MiaSolé’s arguments or positions regarding consolidation or a
further delay of trial in this case.
03996.51801/4682899.2

1
STIPULATED MOTION FOR AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

1

By and through their respective undersigned counsel, the parties hereby move the Court for

2

an Amended Case Management Order modifying the schedule set forth in the Court’s Second

3

Amended Case Management Order (ECF No. 79, filed August 19, 2011) as follows:

4
5

EVENT

CURRENT DEADLINE

PROPOSED DEADLINE

6

Further Joint Case Management
Report

within 30 days of claim
construction ruling

within 30 days of claim
construction ruling

7

Advice of Counsel Disclosure

50 days after claim
construction ruling

50 days after claim
construction ruling

Fact Discovery Cutoff

May 4, 2012

July 13, 2012

Designation of Opening Experts
with Reports

May 11, 2012

July 27, 2012

11

Designation of Rebuttal Experts
with Reports

May 25, 2012

August 17, 2012

12

Expert Discovery Cutoff

June 8, 2012

August 31, 2012

13

Deadline(s) for Filing Discovery
Motions

See Civil Local Rule 37-3

See Civil Local Rule 37-3

See Civil Local Rule 7-2

September 14, 2012

15

Deadline for Filing and Serving
Dispositive Motions

16

Last Day for Dispositive Motion
Hearing

10:00 a.m. on July 10, 2012

10:00 A.M. on November 6,
2012

Final Pretrial Conference

2:00 p.m. on August 14, 2012

2:00 P.M. on November 27,
2012

Trial

9:30 a.m. on Aug. 27, 2012

9:00 A.M. December 3, 2012

8
9
10

14

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

03996.51801/4682899.2

2
STIPULATED MOTION FOR AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

1
2

Dated April 2, 2012
I, Case Collard, attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained

3 from the other signatory below.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

/s/ Case Collard
Gregory S. Tamkin
Case Collard
DORSEY & WHITNEY, LLP
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
1400 Wewatta Street, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80202-5549
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff Solannex, Inc.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
4/3/2012

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

/s/ Ray Zado
Claude M. Stern
Ray Zado
Anna T. Neill
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor
Redwood Shores, California 94065-2139
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant MiaSolé, Inc.
U.S. Magistrate Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
On April 2, 2012, I caused the foregoing document, titled STIPULATED MOTION FOR
AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER, to be electronically filed with the court, which will
cause a Notice of Electronic Filing to be automatically generated by the court’s electronic filing
system and sent to all parties in this case. Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Sections II.G. and
IX, the Notice of Electronic Filing when e-mailed to the email addresses of record for counsel in
the case constitutes service on the receiving parties.

19
/s/ Case Collard
Case Collard

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
03996.51801/4682899.2

3
STIPULATED MOTION FOR AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER