Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Landmark Screens, LLC v. Morgan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


January 30, 2009

LANDMARK SCREENS, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP, A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP; AND THOMAS D. KOHLER, AN INDIVIDUAL, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Honorable Jeremy Fogel

STIPULATION TO ENLARGE TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Courtroom 3, 5th Floor

Date Comp. Filed: May 21, 2008

Trial Date: None set

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2 and 7-12, the Parties hereby enter into the following Stipulation to Enlarge Time to File Responsive Pleading to Second Amended Complaint.

WHEREAS, on January 20, 2009, the Court granted in part and denied in part Defendants' motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(4)(A), Defendants have until Tuesday, February 3, 2009 to file their Responsive Pleading to the Second Amended Complaint; additional time in which to file their Responsive Pleading to the Second Amended Complaint, and Plaintiff Landmark Screens, LLC has agreed to such an extension of time; time in which to file a Responsive Pleading to Defendants' Responsive Pleading and Defendants have agreed to such an extension of time;

WHEREAS, Defendants have requested from Plaintiff Landmark Screens, LLC

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Landmark Screens, LLC has requested from Defendants additional

WHEREAS, the parties previously stipulated to enlarge time to respond to the First Amended Complaint (Docket No. 6); that following reassignment from a Magistrate Judge to this Court, the parties stipulated to a response and briefing cycle for a motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint (Docket Nos. 13, 14); and that following the grant of Defendants' motion to dismiss and Plaintiff's filing of a Second Amended Complaint, the parties stipulated to a response and briefing cycle for a motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (Docket No. 32);

WHEREAS, this is the first request to extend time to file a Responsive Pleading following the Court's January 20, 2009 Order.

WHEREAS, the proposed time modification does not interfere with any scheduled event in this matter and will not materially affect the schedule for this case;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and among the undersigned, that:

1. The deadline for Defendants to file their Responsive Pleading to the Second Amended Complaint is continued until Tuesday, February 10, 2009. 27

2. The deadline for Plaintiff to file a Responsive Pleading, if any, to Defendants' Responsive Pleading shall be and is extended by seven (7) days.

Dated: January 29, 2009

Dated: January 28, 2009

Filer's Attestation: Pursuant to General Order 45, Steven P. Ragland hereby attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from Clark S. Stone.

ORDER PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. The Case Management Conference set for February 6, 2009 is CONTINUED to February 27, 2009.

HONORABLE JEREMY FOGEL

20090130

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.