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 Att. 1

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. In light of changes in the case, including the addition of new third-party claims, the likely addition of other new parties, and defendant Bloosky Interactive, LLC's retention of new counsel, the Court, having considered the Stipulated Motion filed herewith and for good cause appearing, HEREBY ORDERS that: 1. The scheduling order entered on July 20, 2010 is hereby vacated. [PROPOSED] AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER Case No. 09-cv-1068-BSJ District Judge Bruce S. Jenkins

Dockets.Justia.com

2.

Amendment of Pleadings and Addition of Parties. The cutoff date for

filing a motion to amend the pleadings and/or to join additional parties shall be January 14, 2011. 3. Discovery Plan: a. Except for distinguishing between fact discovery and expert

discovery as outlined below, discovery will not be conducted in phases nor will particular issues be focused. b. Discovery Limitations. (1) Depositions: 20 depositions by

Plaintiff(s) and 20 depositions by Defendant(s), exclusive on both sides of any expert depositions; 7 hours per each deposition (unless extended by agreement of the parties); (2) Interrogatories: 40 interrogatories by any Party to any Party; (3) Request for Admissions: no limit; and (4) Requests for Production: 50 requests for production by any Party to any Party. c. Claims of Privilege. A two-tiered Protective Order was entered on

May 28, 2010 between Google and Defendant Pacific Webworks. Bloosky reserves the right to seek to modify the existing Protective Order or move for a new protective order, if necessary. d. Expert Reports. Reports from experts under Rule 26(a)(2) will be

submitted by the Plaintiff and Defendant(s) by June 17, 2011. The Parties jointly propose that counter-reports must be submitted by July 29, 2011. e. Fact Discovery and Expert Discovery Cutoffs: Fact discovery will

close on April 21, 2011, and expert-discovery will close on September 16, 2011. The

2

deadline for filing dispositive or potentially dispositive motions and Daubert motions will be October 21, 2011. f. Electronic Discovery. The Parties shall cooperate with each other

to produce documents and electronically stored information in a file format that is reasonable and requested by the other party. 4. 5. A Pre-Trial Hearing will be held December 16, 2011 at 9:30 a.m. An agreed-to-form Pretrial Order, signed by counsel for the Parties (even

if the Parties disagree on content), shall be submitted by December 9, 2011. The Order shall contain a list of all disputed issues of law as well as a list of all disputed issues of fact. The Pretrial Order shall also include a list of witnesses and exhibits that supports each sides' affirmative claims and defenses. 6. The parties have engaged in dialog regarding potential settlement and

believe that there is a fair possibility for settlement. This case should be referred to the Court's alternative dispute resolution program for mediation. The case should be reevaluated for settlement/ADR resolution on March 11, 2011. 7. The case is set for jury trial and is expected to take approximately 5 full

trial days. A date will be scheduled at the Final Pretrial Hearing. SO ORDERED. DATED this ________ day of September, 2010. BY THE COURT:

Honorable Bruce S. Jenkins United States District Court Judge

3

APPROVED AS TO FORM: HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP /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/ 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

/s/ Robert E. Mansfield SNELL & WILMER, LLP Robert E. Mansfield, #6272 Todd M. Shaughnessy, #6651 Attorneys for Third-Party Defendant Pacific WebWorks, Inc.

4