GPNE Corp. v. Barnes & Noble, Inc.

Filing 42

ORDER REGARDING STIPULATION FOR AN ORDER EXTENDING PLAINTIFFS TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STAY. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on February 5, 2013. (lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SAN JOSE DIVISION United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 GNPE Corp., Plaintiff, v. Apple, Inc., 14 Defendant. 15 16 17 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 12-CV-02885-LHK and Related Case Nos. 12-CV-03055LHK, 12-CV-03056-LHK, and 12-CV03057-LHK ORDER REGARDING STIPULATION FOR AN ORDER EXTENDING PLAINTIFF’S TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY The parties have filed a stipulation seeking an order extending Plaintiff GPNE Corp.’s 18 (“Plaintiff”) time to respond to Defendants’ Apple, Inc., Amazon.com, Inc., Nokia Corp., Nokia 19 Inc., Pantech Co., Ltd., and Pantech Wireless, Inc.’s recently filed Motion to Stay. ECF No. 58. 20 Notably, each of the Defendants filed an identical copy of the Motion to Stay in their respective 21 cases. However, Defendants filed the Motion to Stay on different days. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s 22 response to the Motion to Stay is due on February 7, 2013 in Case No. 12-CV-2885-LHK, 23 February 8, 2013 in Case Nos. 12-CV-03055-LHK and 12-CV-3056-LHK, and February 15 in 24 Case No. 12-CV-3057-LHK. The parties now seek to extend Plaintiff’s deadline TO RESPOND to 25 the Motion to Stay to February 11, 2013 in Case Nos. 12-CV-2885-LHK, 2-CV-03055-LHK, and 26 12-CV-3056-LHK. The parties do not seek to extend Plaintiff’s deadline to respond in Case No. 27 12-CV-3057. 28 1 Case No.: 12-CV-02885-LHK ORDER REGARDING STIPULATION FOR AN ORDER EXTENDING PLAINTIFF’S TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY 1 The Court hereby ORDERS that Plaintiff file a single 10 page response to all Defendants’ 2 Motions to Stay on February 8, 2013. Defendants shall file a single, joint, 5 page reply by 3 February 15, 2013. Defendants are also advised that, going forward, where all Defendants join in a 4 motion, Defendants should file one motion for all cases, rather than filing separate, identical 5 motions on different days. The Court also advises Defendants that, where Defendants all join in a 6 motion, Defendants need not deliver separate copies of the moving papers for each case. A single 7 copy will suffice. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: February 5, 2013 ____________________________________ LUCY H. KOH United States District Judge United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Case No.: 12-CV-02885-LHK ORDER REGARDING STIPULATION FOR AN ORDER EXTENDING PLAINTIFF’S TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY

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?