Joint Venture Partners International, Inc. v. Clyne

Filing 33

ORDER GRANTING 32 STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINES. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 12/13/2017. (ejdlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/13/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

MARIO A. MOYA (State Bar No. 262059)
REBECCA M. HOBERG (State Bar No. 224086)
LAW OFFICE OF MARIO A. MOYA
1300 Clay Street, Suite 600
Oakland, California 94612
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Complainant
IAN CLYNE

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

12

JOINT VENTURE PARTNERS
INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Wyoming
corporation;

13

Plaintiff,

11

14
15
16
17
18
19

v.

22
23
24
25
26

STIPULATION TO EXTEND PENDING
DEADLINES

Civil L.R. 6.2(a)

IAN CLYNE, an individual; and DOES 1-30,
inclusive,
Defendants.
_______________________________
IAN CLYNE, an individual;
Cross-Complainant,

20
21

Case No. 5:17-cv-02515-EJD

v.
JOINT VENTURE PARTNERS
INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Wyoming
corporation; JAY DEE SHIVERDAKER, an
individual and as successor-in-interest to
AMERICAN MEDICAL REVENUE, LLC;
and DOES 1-25, inclusive,
Cross-Defendants.

27
28
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND PENDING DEADLINES

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(a) — and in light of continuing settlement discussions

2

following a full-day mediation — Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant Joint Venture Partners

3

International, Inc. (“JVP”), Cross-Defendant Jay Dee Shiverdaker, Cross-Defendant American

4

Medical Revenue, LLC (“AMR”), and Defendant and Cross-Complainant Ian Clyne, by and

5

through their respective counsel of record, respectfully request that the Court enter the following

6

stipulation to continue the date of the Case Management Conference and all pending deadlines,

7

including the deadline to file a responsive pleading, to exchange initial disclosures, and to hold a

8

Rule 26(f) conference.

9
10

Background
Plaintiff JVP initiated this action on March 8, 2017 in the California Superior Court for

11

Napa County. Defendant and Cross-Complainant Clyne removed the action to the U.S. District

12

Court for the Northern District of California, on May 2, 2017, after asserting federal copyright

13

causes of action as cross claims.

14

This case was initially assigned to Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte, who issued an

15

order on May 3, 2017 (Dkt No. 5) setting various ADR deadlines. The matter was reassigned to

16

the Honorable Edward J. Davila, and on May 22, 2017, Judge Davila issued an order setting

17

additional disclosure and case management deadlines. The parties were engaged in meaningful

18

meet-and-confer discussions at the time about matters that may affect the Cross-Defendants’

19

representation and filed three stipulations to extend the time to respond to the cross-complaint

20

(see Dkt. Nos. 16, 19 and 21). In addition, to further these discussions and attempt to informally

21

resolve the case, the parties agreed to engage in early private mediation. To this end, and also as

22

a result of unusual personal matters relating to counsel for Defendant, the parties requested and

23

the Court granted an extension to complete mediation until December 10, 2017 and further

24

continued the case management conference until January 11, 2018. (See Dkt. Nos. 30 & 31).

25

The parties wish to report that they have participated in a full-day private mediation on

26

November 28, 2017 before Carol Kingsley. Ms. Kingsley continues to assist the parties with

27

ongoing mediation services, and the parties are currently engaged in productive settlement

28

discussions. The parties have made significant progress toward resolution and do not wish for
2
STIPULATION TO EXTEND PENDING DEADLINES

1

pending deadlines to interfere with their efforts to resolve the dispute amicably. The subject

2

matter at issue in this litigation is technical and complex, and more time is needed to allow

3

further settlement negotiations between the parties. In addition, the parties believe that

4

substantive litigation at this juncture will significantly impede any possibility of early settlement

5

between the parties.

6
7

Stipulation
Based on these facts, the Parties believe a continuance is necessary to give the Parties

8

adequate time to further settlement negotiations. The Parties believe a continuance would be in

9

the interest of judicial economy, conserve the Court’s and the Parties’ resources, and allow for a

10
11
12

more efficient and productive discussion with the Court at the Case Management Conference.
The Parties have met and conferred about these matters, and they have agreed to jointly
request the following continuances:

13

•

The Parties stipulate to, and jointly request, a continuance of the Case

14

Management Conference to the earliest possible date after February 15, 2018,

15

subject to the convenience of the Court.

16

•

The Parties stipulate to, and jointly request, a postponement of the deadlines for

17

filing initial disclosures, a Rule 26(f) report, and a Case Management Statement to

18

January 23, 2018.

19

•

The parties stipulate to, and jointly request, that the time for the Cross-Defendants

20

to respond to the Cross-Complaint filed in this action be extended to January 22,

21

2018.

22

//

23
24

//

25
26

//

27
28
3
STIPULATION TO EXTEND PENDING DEADLINES

1

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

2

Respectfully submitted,

3
4

DATED: December 12, 2017

DONAHUE FITZGERALD LLP

5

/s/ Casey Williams

6

Casey Williams

7

Attorneys for Plaintiff & Cross-Defendants

8

DATED: December 12, 2017

9

The LAW OFFICE OF MARIO A. MOYA
/s/ Mario A. Moya

10

Mario A. Moya

11

Attorneys for Defendant & Cross-Complainant

12
13

[Proposed Order Follows per Civ. L. R. 7-12]

14
15
16
17

[PROPOSED] ORDER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

18
19

December
DATED: _______ 13, 2017

HON. EDWARD DAVILA

20
21
22
23
24

U.S. District Judge
Northern District of California

25
26
27
28
4
STIPULATION TO EXTEND PENDING DEADLINES