Hangingout, Inc. v. Google, Inc.

Filing 59

Joint MOTION Modification of Case Schedule by Google, Inc.. (Caruso, Margaret) (cxl).

1 Margret M. Caruso (SBN 243473)

Cheryl A. Galvin (SBN 252262)

2 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
th

555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5 Floor

3 Redwood Shores, CA 94065

Telephone: [phone]

4 Facsimile: [phone]
5 Attorneys for Defendant
6

GOOGLE INC.

Andrew D. Skale (SBN 211096)

7 [e-mail]

Ben L. Wagner (SBN 243594)

8 [e-mail]

Justin S. Nahama (SBN 281087)

9 [e-mail]

MINTZ LEVIN COHN FERRIS GLOVSKY AND POPEO P.C.

10 3580 Carmel Mountain Road, Suite 300

San Diego, CA 92130

11 Telephone: [phone]

Facsimile: [phone]

12

Attorneys for Plaintiff

13 HANGINOUT, INC.
14
15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17
18 HANGINOUT, INC., a Delaware

Case No. 3:13-cv-02811-AJB-NLS

19

JOINT MOTION FOR
MODIFICATION OF CASE
SCHEDULE

corporation,

Plaintiff,

20
21

vs.
GOOGLE, INC., a Delaware

22 corporation,
23

Defendant.

24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 3:13-cv-02811-AJB-NLS

1

WHEREAS, Google Inc. (“Defendant”) served its First Request for the

2 Production of Documents on Hanginout, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) on August 15, 2014;
3

WHEREAS, Defendant intends to file an early summary judgment motion

4 addressing a discrete issue that it contends has the potential to be case dispositive,
5 and has diligently pursued discovery on that, and other issues;
6

WHEREAS, Plaintiff is still in the process of completing its document

7 production and does not expect to complete its production until at least December
8 2014;
9

WHEREAS, Google contends the current outstanding discovery it seeks may

10 limit the amount of discovery time, motion practice, and expense necessary should an
11 early summary judgment by Defendant be successful;
12

WHEREAS, Hanginout and Google agree that discovery should be conducted

13 with an eye towards efficiency;
14

WHEREAS, Google takes the position that, given the current state of

15 discovery, insufficient time remains before the current discovery cut-off dates for the
16 parties to complete initial summary judgment briefing, participate in a hearing, and
17 receive an order on that motion in time to obviate the need to complete all remaining
18 discovery, including expert discovery, which would be necessary if Defendant’s early
19 summary judgment motion is not granted;
20

WHEREAS, the parties do not seek to alter the deadlines for the mandatory

21 settlement conference, pretrial disclosures or the pretrial conference;
22

WHEREAS, the parties have not previously requested a continuance for any of

23 the below dates;
24

NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES JOINTLY MOVE and respectfully

25 request that the case deadlines for fact and expert discovery and pretrial motions be
26 modified as follows:
27
28

1
Case No. 3:13-cv-02811-AJB-NLS

1

Current Schedule

2

Completion of fact discovery:

March 20, 2015

3

Designation of opening experts:

April 3, 2015

4

Service of opening expert reports:

May 18, 2015

5

Designation of rebuttal experts:

April 17, 2015

6

Service of rebuttal expert reports:

June 1, 2015

7

Completion of expert discovery:

July 17, 2015

8

Filing of pretrial motions:

August 17, 2015

9
10

Proposed Schedule

11

Completion of fact discovery:

May 8, 2015

12

Designation of opening experts:

May 29, 2015

13

Service of opening expert reports:

June 29, 2015

14

Designation of rebuttal experts:

July 20, 2015

15

Service of rebuttal expert reports:

July 27, 2015

16

Completion of expert discovery:

August 24, 2015

17

Filing of pretrial motions:

September 14, 2015

18
19

Dates to Remain Unchanged

20

Mandatory settlement conference

October 14, 2015

21

Comply with FRCP 26(a)(3)

December 1, 2015

22

Meet and take action under LR 16.1(f)(4)

December 8, 2015

23

Plaintiff’s counsel provide pre-trial order

December 15, 2015

24

File Proposed Final Pretrial Conf. Order

December 22, 2015

25

Final Pretrial Conference

January 8, 2016

26
27
28

2
Case No. 3:13-cv-02811-AJB-NLS

1
2
3

Dated: November 25, 2014

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP

4
5

By: /s/Margret M. Caruso
Margret M. Caruso

6

Attorneys for Defendant
GOOGLE INC.

7
8
9 Dated: November 25, 2014

MINTZ LEVIN COHN FERRIS GLOVSKY
AND POPEO PC

10
11

By /s/ Ben L. Wagner_________________
Ben L. Wagner

12

Attorneys for Plaintiff
HANGINOUT, INC.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3
Case No. 3:13-cv-02811-AJB-NLS

SIGNATURE CERTIFICATION

1
2

Pursuant to Section 2(f)(4) of the Electronic Case Filing Administrative

3 Policies and Procedures Manual, I hereby certify that the content of this document is
4 acceptable to Ben Wagner, counsel for Plaintiff Hanginout, Inc., and that Mr.
5 Wagner’s authorization has been obtained to affix his electronic signature to this
6 document.
7
8 Dated: November 25, 2014

By /s/Margret M. Caruso
Margret M. Caruso

9
10

Attorneys for Defendant
GOOGLE INC.

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
Case No. 3:13-cv-02811-AJB-NLS