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.

Gofron v. Picsel Technologies

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION


July 26, 2010

CARRIE GOFRON, J. WILLIAM VANKE, ASHWINI KUMAR, MATTHEW MIXON, AND DULCE GONZALEZ, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
PICSEL TECHNOLOGIES, INC., LESCIP T LIMITED (FORMERLY PICSEL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED), HAMSARD LIMITED, MASOOD JABBAR AND IMRAN KHAND, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Hon. Claudia Wilken

[Complaint Filed: August 31, 2009]

STIPULATION EXTENDING DEFENDANT LESCIP T LIMITED'S TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-1(a)

Trial Date: None Set

action;

pursuant to which they, inter alia, added defendant LESCIP T. LIMITED ("Lescip") to the action;

"Administration") on July 15, 2009, and John Bruce Cartwright and Graham Frost were appointed

WHEREAS on June 16, 2010, the Administrators were allegedly served with the

WHEREAS on August 31, 2009, Plaintiffs filed their original Complaint in this

WHEREAS on May 21, 2010, Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint,

WHEREAS Lescip is a UK-based company that entered into administration (the Joint Administrators of Lescip (the "Administrators");

Lescip to plead, answer or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint would have been on or about July 7, 2010;

Administrators of Lescip to respond to the First Amended Complaint through August 3, 2010;

Judge Edward M. Chen so ordered on July 13, 2010;

First Amended Complaint and plead, answer or otherwise respond to the First Amended

WHEREAS the parties believe and agreed on July 21, 2010, that it is prudent, desirable and efficient to further extend the time for the Administrators of Lescip to respond to the

WHEREAS an extension of time until Tuesday, August 17, 2010 for the Administrators of Lescip to plead, answer or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint will not alter the date of any event or deadline already fixed by Court order in this action;

WHEREAS if service were deemed proper, the due date for the Administrators of

WHEREAS on July 7, 2010, the parties agreed to extend the time for the

WHEREAS on July 12, 2010, the parties filed the Stipulation Extending Defendant Lescip T Limited's Time to Respond to Complaint Pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(a), which Magistrate

WHEREAS the Administrators of Lescip require additional time to evaluate the Complaint;

NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(a), it is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between Plaintiffs and the Administrators of Lescip that:

The Administrators of Lescip shall have through to and including Tuesday, August 17, 2010 to plead, answer or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint in this action.

This stipulation is entered into without waiver of any and all defenses available to the Administrators of Lescip, including without limitation, lack of personal jurisdiction, improper service and that commencing this action against Lescip is a violation of the moratorium in the Administration, and is not a concession that service has been effected on Lescip or the Administrators of Lescip.

IT IS SO STIPULATED

Dated: July 22, 2010 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP STEVEN B. SACKS Attorneys for Defendant LESCIP T. LIMITED

Dated: July 22, 2010 18 CRAIG A. MARR, ATTORNEY AT LAW CRAIG A. MARR Attorney for Plaintiffs

IT IS SO ORDERED

20100726

© 1992-2010 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.