Universal Tube & Rollform Equipment Corporation v. YouTube, Inc.

Filing 18

Order of Case Management Conference held on 3/5/2007. Track: standard. Plaintiff's opposition to motion to dismiss due March 15, 2007; reply due April 2, 2007. Further scheduling held in abeyance pending adjudication of motion to dismiss. Signed by Judge James G. Carr on 3/8/2007.(S,AL)

Download PDF
Universal Tube & Rollform Equipment Corporation v. YouTube, Inc. Doc. 18 Case 3:06-cv-02628-JGC Document 18 Filed 03/08/2007 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION Universal Tube & Rollform Equipment Corporation, Plaintiff v. YouTube, Inc., Defendant Case management conference was held March 5, 2007. The track designation is standard. It is also ORDERED THAT: Plaintiff's opposition to motion to dismiss due March 15, 2007; reply due April 2, 2007. Further scheduling held in abeyance pending adjudication of motion to dismiss. Re. Electronic Filing All further proceedings are to be filed electronically. Failure of counsel to take all steps necessary to file and receive electronic pleadings, notices, and orders within four weeks of the CMC shall not be accepted as grounds for vacating any adverse action resulting from the non-receipt of any pleading, notice, or order that was filed by other counsel or the Court electronically. Counsel should file all pleadings and briefs in an electronic format [rather than scanning them for filing]. Exhibits prepared electronically should normally be filed electronically; otherwise exhibits may be scanned for filing. CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER Case No. 3:06CV2628 Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:06-cv-02628-JGC Document 18 Filed 03/08/2007 Page 2 of 2 If counsel file scanned briefs, they shall simultaneously send an electronic version to Amy_L._Schroeder@ohnd.uscourts.gov. So ordered. s/James G. Carr James G. Carr Chief Judge

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?