Google v. Pacific Webworks

Filing 78

Stipulated MOTION for Scheduling Order filed by ThirdParty Plaintiff Bloosky Interactive, LLC, Defendant Bloosky Interactive, LLC, Plaintiff Google, ThirdParty Defendant Pacific Webworks. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Amended Scheduling Order)(Kimrey, Blaine)

Google v. Pacific Webworks

Doc. 78

LATHROP & GAGE LLP Blaine C. Kimrey (Pro Hac Vice) [e-mail] Bryan K. Clark (Pro Hac Vice) [e-mail] 100 N. Riverside Plaza, Suite 2100 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] CHRISTIANSEN & JACKSON PC Blair R. Jackson (10170) Greg Christiansen (10755) 10421 S. Jordan Gateway, Suite 600 South Jordan, UT 84095 Telephone: [phone] Attorneys for defendant Bloosky Interactive, LLC IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION GOOGLE INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, v. BLOOSKY INTERACTIVE, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, and DOES 2-50, Defendant. Plaintiff Google, Inc. ("Google"), defendant/third-party plaintiff Bloosky Interactive, LLC ("Bloosky"), and third-party defendant Pacific WebWorks, Inc. ("PWW") (collectively the "Parties"), by and through their undersigned counsel, respectfully submit this Stipulated Motion for Amended Scheduling Order. Pursuant to D.U. Civ. R. 7-1(b), no memorandum of supporting authorities is required for this type of motion. In support of this motion, the Parties state as follows: STIPULATED MOTION FOR AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER Case No. 09-cv-1068-BSJ District Judge Bruce S. Jenkins

Dockets.Justia.com

1.

The original scheduling order was entered by this Court on July 20, 2010.

That order, inter alia, set the cutoff date for filing a motion to amend the pleadings and/or join additional parties as September 30, 2010. 2. Since that order was entered, new third-party claims have been asserted,

Bloosky has retained new counsel, and Google has continued its efforts to identify additional potential defendants. The Parties are also in the process of scheduling a mediation that may result in a resolution of the claims at issue in this case. To facilitate settlement discussions, the Parties have stayed the obligation to respond to discovery pending the outcome of mediation. 3. In light of these changes, the Parties believe that the current scheduling

order should be vacated and a new scheduling order entered with the dates as indicated in the attached proposed order. WHEREFORE, the Parties jointly apply to this Court for entry of the Amended Scheduling Order, which is attached for the Court's review. Dated: September 23, 2010 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Blaine C. Kimrey LATHROP & GAGE LLP Blaine C. Kimrey (Pro Hac Vice) Bryan K. Clark (Pro Hac Vice) JACKSON & CHRISTIANSEN, P.C. Greg Christiansen, #10755 Blair Jackson, #10170 Attorneys for defendant-third party plaintiff Bloosky Interactive, LLC

2

/s/ Roger R. Myers HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP Scott R. Bialecki (Pro Hac Vice) Roger R. Myers (Pro Hac Vice) George M. Haley, #1302 Blaine J. Benard, #5661 Craig Buschmann, #10696 Attorneys for plaintiff Google Inc.

/s/ Robert E. Mansfield SNELL & WILMER, LLP Robert E. Mansfield, #6272 Todd M. Shaughnessy, #6651 Attorneys for third-party defendant Pacific WebWorks, Inc.

3