Dong v. Various, Inc. et al
Filing
17
ORDER STAYING CASE. Accordingly, this action is STAYED in favor of Defendants' bankruptcy proceedings as to all claims asserted against Defendants until further order of the court. The clerk shall ADMINISTRATIVELYCLOSE this file. Joint Case Management Statement due by 12/6/2013. Case Management Conference set for 12/13/2013 10:00 AM in Courtroom 4, 5th Floor, San Jose before Hon. Edward J. Davila. ***10/18/2013 CMC Deadlines terminated. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 9/18/2013. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Sid Leach (Bar No. TX 12086400 & AZ 019519)
sleach@swlaw.com
David E. Rogers (AZ 19274 pro hac vice)
drogers@swlaw.com
David G. Barker (AZ 024657 pro hac vice)
dbarker@swlaw.com
Jacob C. Jones (AZ 029971 pro hac vice)
jcjones@swlaw.com
SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
One Arizona Center
400 E. Van Buren, Suite 1900
Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2202
Telephone:
602.382.6000
Facsimile:
602.382.6070
SPENCER HOSIE (CA Bar No. 101777)
shosie@hosielaw.com
DIANE S. RICE (CA Bar No. 118303)
drice@hosielaw.com
DARRELL R. ATKINSON (CA Bar
No. 280564)
datkinson@hosielaw.com
HOSIE RICE LLP
600 Montgomery Street, 34th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
(415) 247-6000 Tel.
(415) 247-6001 Fax
Attorneys for Defendant
VENTURE CORPORATION AND
CEBELIAN HOLDING PTE, LTD.
Attorneys for Plaintiff
FITEQ, INC.
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
SAN JOSE DIVISION
14
15
FITEQ, INC.,
16
17
18
19
20
Case No. 13-cv-01946-EJD
Plaintiff,
v.
VENTURE CORPORATION AND
CEBELIAN HOLDING PTE, LTD.,
XXXXXXXX
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REGARDING EXTENSION
OF TIME TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFF FITEQ, INC.’S MOTION
FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Defendant.
21
Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiff FiTeq, Inc. (“FiTeq” or “Plaintiff”)
22
and Defendants Venture Corporation (“Venture” or “Defendant”) and Cebelian Holding Pte, Ltd.
23
(“Cebelian” or Defendant”) hereby stipulate through their respective counsel of record as follows:
24
WHEREAS, on September 13, 2013, Plaintiff filed its Notice of Motion and Motion for
25
Preliminary Injunction (hereafter, “Motion”) requesting an Order to be entered requiring
26
Defendant Venture to produce certain documentation;
27
WHEREAS, Ventures’ Opposition to the Motion is currently due on or before September
28
SNELL & WILMER
—————— L.L.P. ——————
PHOENIX
Stipulation and [Proposed]
Order Regarding Extension
of Time to Respond
Case No. 13-CV-01946-EJD
1
27, 2013;
2
WHEREAS, Venture has requested an extension of time as set forth below, the Parties
3
stipulate and agree that Venture’s Opposition to FiTeq’s Motion is due one week later than its
4
presently scheduled due date of September 27, 2013, i.e., by October 4, 2013, and FiTeq’s Reply
5
Brief is due by October 11, 2013; and
6
WHEREAS FiTeq’s agreement to the extension is conditioned upon there being no
7
extension of the date of hearing, so that the Parties stipulate that this change in the briefing
8
schedule shall not change the hearing date of October 18, 2013 at 9:00 a.m.;
9
10
11
12
13
WHEREAS, no trial date has yet been set in this action;
WHEREAS, the Parties have not requested nor received any previous extensions of time
related to the Motion;
WHEREAS, this extension will not affect or change the other dates currently scheduled
by the Court; and
14
NOW THEREFORE the Parties through their undersigned counsel hereby stipulate and
15
request that the Court grant, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, that Venture’s time to oppose the
16
Motion is extended to October 4, 2013 and that FiTeq’s time to file its reply brief is extended to
17
October 11, 2013, while the hearing date shall remain unchanged, on October 18, 2013.
18
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SNELL & WILMER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PHOENIX
Stipulation and [Proposed]
Order Regarding Extension
of Time to Respond
-2-
Case No. 13-CV-01946-EJD
1
Dated: September 17, 2013
SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
2
By: /s/ David E. Rogers
Sid Leach
David E. Rogers
David G. Barker
Jacob C. Jones
3
4
5
Attorneys for Defendant
Venture Corporation and Cebelian Holding
Pte, LTD.
6
7
8
HOSIE RICE LLP
9
By: /s/ Spencer Hosie
Spencer Hosie
Attorneys for FiTeq, Inc.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SNELL & WILMER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PHOENIX
Stipulation and [Proposed]
Order Regarding Extension
of Time to Respond
-3-
Case No. 13-CV-01946-EJD
1
2
ATTESTATION
I hereby attest pursuant to General Order 45.X.B. that concurrence in the electronic filing
3
of this document has been obtained from the other signatories.
4
Dated: September 17, 2013
5
/s/ David E. Rogers
David E. Rogers
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SNELL & WILMER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PHOENIX
Stipulation and [Proposed]
Order Regarding Extension
of Time to Respond
-4-
Case No. 13-CV-01946-EJD
1
2
[PROPOSED] ORDER
XXXXXXXX
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION IT IS ORDERED THAT (1) Defendants’ time to
3
oppose FiTeq’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction is extended to October 4, 2013, such that
4
Defendant will be deemed to have timely filed and served its opposition if filed and served by
5
October 4, 2013, (2) FiTeq’s time to file its reply brief is extended to October 11, 2013, such that
6
FiTeq will have deemed to have timely filed and served its reply brief if filed and served by
7
October 11, 2013, and (3) the hearing date for the Motion shall remain on October 18, 2013 at
8
9:00 a.m.
9
10
18
Dated: September ___, 2013
11
__________________________________
Honorable Edward J. Davila
U.S. District Court Judge
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SNELL & WILMER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PHOENIX
Stipulation and [Proposed]
Order Regarding Extension
of Time to Respond
-5-
Case No. 13-CV-01946-EJD
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?