Function Media, L.L.C. v. Google, Inc. et al

Filing 64

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File to Extend Privilege Log Deadline by Google, Inc., Yahoo!, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Powers, Matthew)

Function Media, L.L.C. v. Google, Inc. et al

Doc. 64

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION FUNCTION MEDIA, L.L.C., Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE, INC. and YAHOO!, INC., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § § §

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2-007-CV-279 (CE) JURY TRIAL

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRIVILEGE LOG DEADLINE Come now Defendants Yahoo!, Inc. and Google Inc. (collectively, "Defendants") and file this Joint Motion to Extend Privilege Log Deadline, and in support of same would show the Court as follows: I. On June 30, 2008, the Court Granted Defendants' Unopposed Motion to Extend Privilege Log Deadlines and Document Production Deadlines (Dkt. No. 59). privilege log deadline in this case is: September 29, 2008 Letter to the Court stating that there are no disputes as to claims of privileged documents (if there are no such disputes). The current

Defendants respectfully request that the above deadline from the Court's June 30, 2008, Order be extended for all parties to: November 17, 2008 Letter to the Court stating that there are no disputes as to claims of privileged documents (if there are no such disputes). II. This motion is unopposed by Plaintiff. Moreover, this Motion is not sought for delay, but that justice might be done.

Dockets.Justia.com

September 26, 2008

By:

______/S/_Douglas E. Lumish DOUGLAS E. LUMISH Lead Attorney (CA Bar No. 183863) (Admitted pro hac vice) [e-mail] MATTHEW D. POWERS (CA Bar No. 104795) [e-mail] JEFFREY G. HOMRIG (CA Bar No. 215890) [e-mail] WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP Silicon Valley Office 201 Redwood Shores Parkway Redwood Shores, CA 94065 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone]

___

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT YAHOO!, INC. By: _/S/_Thomas B. Walsh, IV (by permission) Juanita R. Brooks ­ Lead Attorney (CA SBN 75934) E-mail: [e-mail] Jason W. Wolff (CA SBN 215819) E-mail: [e-mail] Fish & Richardson P.C. 12390 El Camino Real San Diego, CA 92130 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Thomas B. Walsh, IV Texas Bar No. 00785173 E-mail: [e-mail] Fish & Richardson P.C. 5000 Bank One Center 1717 Main Street Dallas, TX 75201 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone]

2

Harry L. Gillam, Jr. Texas Bar No. 07921800 E-mail: [e-mail] Melissa R. Smith Texas Bar No. 24001351 E-mail: [e-mail] GILLAM & SMITH, L.L.P. 303 South Washington Avenue Marshall, TX 75670 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT GOOGLE INC.

3

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE I hereby certify that counsel for Plaintiff, Jeremy Brandon, has been contacted regarding the relief requested in this motion. Mr. Brandon stated that Plaintiff was not opposed to the relief requested.

/s/ Jeffrey Homrig Jeffrey Homrig

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served this 26th day of September, 2008, with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3).

Debbie Skolaski Debbie Skolaski

4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION FUNCTION MEDIA, L.L.C., Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE, INC. and YAHOO!, INC., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § § §

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2-007-CV-279 (CE) JURY TRIAL

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRIVILEGE LOG DEADLINE BEFORE THE COURT is Defendants Google Inc. and Yahoo!, Inc.'s (collectively, "Defendants") Unopposed Motion to Extend Privilege Log Deadline, filed on September 26, 2008. After considering the Motion, the relief requested therein, and the fact that it is unopposed, the Court hereby GRANTS the Motion. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the current privilege log deadline in this case from the Court's June 30, 2008, Order (Dkt. No. 59) is changed as follows: November 17, 2008 Letter to the Court stating that there are no disputes as to claims of privileged documents (if there are no such disputes).

5