Payoda, Inc. v. Photon Infotech, Inc.

Filing 18

ORDER granting 17 Stipulation Modifying Briefing Schedule on Motion to Dismiss. Responses due by 11/19/2014. Replies due by 12/3/2014. Signed by Hon. Beth Labson Freeman on 11/3/2014. (blflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/3/2014)

1

4

Craig Alan Hansen, Esq. (Cal. Bar No. 209622)
Law Offices of Craig Hansen
560 S. Winchester Blvd., Suite 500
San Jose, CA 95128
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

5

Attorneys for Plaintiff Payoda, Inc.

2
3

6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

10
11

PAYODA, INC., a New York corporation,

12
13
14
15

Case No. 5:14-CV-04103-BLF

Plaintiff,

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
MODIFYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON
MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER RULE 12(B)(6)
AND 12(B)(7)

v.
PHOTON INFOTECH, INC., a California
corporation,

Date: March 5, 2015
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Courtroom: 3, 5th Floor
Before the Hon. Beth Labson Freeman

Defendant.

16
17
18

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2(a), counsel hereby make a stipulated request to grant Plaintiff

19

Payoda, Inc. (“Payoda”) an additional two weeks to file its Opposition to the pending Motion to

20

Dismiss filed by Defendant Photon Infotech, Inc. (“Photon”) and to further grant Photon an

21

additional one week to file its Reply and additional time to file an anti-SLAPP Motion, if necessary.

22

The parties’ particular reasons for making this stipulated request are as follows:

23
24
25

1.

Due to the trial schedule of Photon’s counsel, Payoda previously granted Photon an

additional two weeks to file its response to Payoda’s complaint in this matter;
2.

Due to the trial schedule of Payoda’s counsel, Photon’s counsel wishes to return the

26

professional courtesy by granting Payoda an additional two weeks to files its opposition to Photon’s

27

Motion to Dismiss;

28

3.

While the hearing on Photon’s motion was previously set for December 2, 2014

Stip. and Proposed Order Modifying Briefing Schedule
Re Motion to Dismiss

1

Case No. 5:14-CV-04103-BLF

1

before Hon. Paul S. Grewal, the hearing was continued to March 5, 2014 when the matter was

2

reassigned to Hon. Beth Labson Freeman. Accordingly, the proposed modification will not

3

materially impair the Court’s time to review the parties’ Opposition and Reply papers.

4

4.

The California anti-SLAPP statute states that a “special motion may be filed within

5

60 days of the service of the complaint or, in the court’s discretion, at any later time upon terms it

6

deems proper.” Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 425.16(f) (2014). In light of the issues raised in Photon’s

7

Motion to Dismiss and this request for additional time as to the Opposition, the Parties agree that

8

good cause exists to extend the time for Photon to file an anti-SLAPP motion (if any) until

9

December 3, 2014.

10

Other than the previously described extension of Photon’s response deadline, there have

11

been no other previous time modifications in this case. For the reasons stated above, the requested

12

time modification would have no effect on the schedule for this case.

13

Dated: November 3, 2014

LAW OFFICES OF CRAIG HANSEN
By:

14
15

Attorney for Plaintiff
PAYODA, INC.

16
17

Dated: November 3, 2014

COMPUTERLAW GROUP LLP
By:

18
19

21

23
24

/s/ Christopher Sargent
Christopher Sargent
Attorneys for Defendant
PHOTON INFOTECH, INC.

20

22

/s/ Craig Alan Hansen
Craig Alan Hansen

PROPOSED ORDER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING,
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Payoda may have until November 19, 2014 to file its Opposition papers. Photon may have

25

until December 3, 2014 in which to file its Reply and until December 3, 2014 to file its anti-SLAPP

26

motion, if any.

27
28

Dated: November 3, 2014
United States District Court Judge
Stip. and Proposed Order Modifying Briefing Schedule
Re Motion to Dismiss

2

Case No. 5:14-CV-04103-BLF