Cambridge University Press et al v. Patton et al
Joint MOTION for Order on Scheduling with Brief In Support by Ronald Henry, J. L. Albert, Kenneth R. Bernard, Jr, James A. Bishop, Hugh A. Carter, Jr, William H. Cleveland, Robert F. Hatcher, Felton Jenkins, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr, James R. Jolly, Donald M. Leebern, Jr, Eldridge McMillan, William NeSmith, Jr, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Willis J. Potts, Jr, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Kessel Stelling, Jr, Benjamin J. Tarbutton, III, Richard L. Tucker, Allan Vigil, Cambridge University Press, Mark P. Becker, Nancy Seamans, Oxford University Press, Inc., Sage Publications, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Rains, John)
Cambridge University Press et al v. Patton et al
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, et al., Plaintiffs, -vs.MARK P. BECKER, in his official capacity as Georgia State University President, et al., Defendants. JOINT MOTION FOR THE ENTRY OF A SCHEDULING ORDER, AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, Inc., and Sage Publications, Inc. (collectively "Plaintiffs") and Defendants Mark P. Becker, Ron Henry, Nancy Seamans, J.L. Albert, Kenneth R. Bernard, Jr., James A. Bishop, Hugh A. Carter, Jr., William H. Cleveland, Robert F. Hatcher, Felton Jenkins, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., James R. Jolly, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge McMillan, William NeSmith, Jr., Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Willis J. Potts, Jr., Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Kessel Stelling, Jr., Benjamin J. Tarbutton, III, Civil Action File No.1:08-CV-1425-ODE
Richard L. Tucker, and Allan Vigil in their official capacities only (collectively "Defendants"), by and through their undersigned counsel, respectfully move the Court for a modification of the discovery and summary judgment deadlines in this action. In support of this motion, the Parties show the Court as follows: 1. This copyright infringement action was commenced on April 15, 2008 when Plaintiffs filed their complaint. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on December 15, 2008, at the consent of Defendants, to add as Defendants individual members of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia in their official capacities. 2. The Court entered a scheduling Order in this case on July 30, 2008 providing for an eight-month discovery period. 3. The Court entered a second scheduling order in this case on February 24, 2009 extending the time to complete discovery until May 25, 2009.
4. The Court entered a third scheduling order in this case on April 22, 2009 extending the time for the parties to schedule and take depositions until June 30, 2009. 5. On May 19, 2009, Defendants designated Kenneth D. Crews as a testifying expert in this case. On June 1, 2009, Defendants served Dr. Crews' expert report on Plaintiffs. 6. Plaintiffs have moved to exclude Dr. Crews expert report and Defendants have responded to that motion. The briefing on the motion is now complete. 7. The Parties agree that, in the interest of efficiency, the schedule for further expert discovery, if any, and the deadline for filing motions for summary judgment and for conducting the post-discovery conference required by Local Rule 16.3 should be tied to the Court's resolution of Plaintiffs' motion to exclude Dr. Crews' expert report.
8. The Parties have agreed on a schedule for motions for summary judgment, including a conditional period of expert discovery prior to summary judgment briefing in the event Plaintiffs' motion to exclude Dr. Crews' expert report is denied in whole or in part. That agreement is memorialized in the proposed scheduling order presented with this motion. 9. The Parties also agree that page limits for summary judgment briefs set forth by the local rules should be altered in this case and that neither Party should be permitted to file any surreply brief with the Court without first receiving leave to do so. That agreement is also memorialized in the proposed scheduling order. WHEREFORE, the Parties respectfully move this Court for entry of a scheduling order setting deadlines for filing motions for summary judgment, holding a post-discovery conference, and conducting expert discovery, if any. A proposed order is attached for the Court's convenience.
Respectfully submitted this 20th day of July, 2009.
/s/ John H. Rains IV Edward B. Krugman Georgia Bar No. 429927 John H. Rains IV Georgia Bar No. 556052 BONDURANT, MIXSON & ELMORE, LLP 1201 West Peachtree Street NW Suite 3900 Atlanta, GA 30309 (404) 881-4100 R. Bruce Rich (pro hac vice) Randi Singer (pro hac vice) Todd D. Larson (pro hac vice) WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 767 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 10153 Attorneys for the Plaintiffs
/s/ Kristen A. Swift (with express permission) Anthony B. Askew Georgia Bar No. 025300 Special Assistant Attorney General Stephen M. Schaetzel Georgia Bar No. 628653 Kristen A. Swift Georgia Bar No. 702536 KING & SPALDING, LLP 1180 Peachtree Street Atlanta, Georgia 30309 (404) 572-5100 Mary Jo Volkert Georgia Bar No. 728755 Assistant Attorney General 40 Capitol Square Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Attorneys for the Defendants
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that this document was prepared in Times New Roman 14 point font. /s/ John H. Rains IV John H. Rains IV
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day filed the foregoing JOINT MOTION FOR THE ENTRY OF A SCHEDULING ORDER, AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF filing system which will automatically send e-mail notification of such filing to the following attorneys of record: Anthony B. Askew, Esq. Stephen M. Schaetzel, Esq. Katrina M. Quicker, Esq. John P. Sheesley, Esq. Kristen A. Swift, Esq. C. Suzanne Johnson, Esq. Laura E. Gary, Esq. King & Spalding 1180 Peachtree Street Atlanta, Georgia 30309 Mary Jo Volkert, Esq. Assistant S. Attorney General 40 Capitol Square Atlanta, Georgia 30334 This 20th day of July, 2009. /s/ John H. Rains IV John H. Rains IV
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?