The opinion of the court was delivered by: United States Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal
Gregory S. Tamkin (State Bar No. 175009) Claude M. Stern (State Bar No. 96737) Case Collard (State Bar No. 245834) Ray Zado (State Bar No. 208501) 2 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP Anna T. Neill (State Bar No. 270858) 1400 Wewatta Street, Suite 400 QUINN E U & 3 MANUEL RQUHART SULLIVAN, LLP Denver, CO 80202-5549 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor 4 Telephone: (303) 629-3400 Redwood Shores, California 94065-2139 Facsimile: (303) 629-3450 Telephone: (650) 801-5000 5 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Facsimile: (650) 801-5100 Email: email@example.com Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Counsel for Plaintiff Solannex, Inc. ("Solannex") has a personal conflict with the current trial date and has conferred with Defendant MiaSole, Inc. ("MiaSole, Inc.") regarding an 19 amendment to the Case Management Order to extend the trial date. The parties ultimately agreed 20 to the dates as listed below.
22 at that time. MiaSole indicate a 14 week delay with a trial date of December 3, 2012 would be 23 acceptable; Solannex agreed.1
Cases Should Be Related (E.C.F. No. 109)-it intends to move for the Court to consolidate or coordinate this case with the recently filed 12-cv-00832-PSG case (between the same parties on related patents and the same technology).
Should the consolidation or coordination be ordered MiaSole would request that the trial on both cases be either the same (if there is consolidation) or coordinated, and likely rescheduled to some time in late 2013 (to accommodate
compliance with local patent rules, including time for a new Markman proceeding and discovery in the more recently filed case). Nothing in this stipulation prejudices MiaSole's arguments or positions regarding consolidation or a further delay of trial in this case.
STIPULATED MOTION FOR AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
Attorneys for Plaintiff Solannex, Inc. Email: email@example.com Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Attorneys for Defendant MiaSole, Inc.
ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION FOR AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
Solannex initially sought a five week extension, but counsel for MiaSole was not available 1 MiaSole wishes to emphasize that-as discussed in its Response to Administrative Motion to Consider Whether 2 an Amended Case Management Order modifying the schedule set forth in the Court's Second 3 Amended Case Management Order (ECF No. 79, filed August 19, 2011) as follows: 4 5
Report construction ruling construction ruling 7
Advice of Counsel Disclosure 50 days after claim 50 days after claim construction ruling construction ruling 8Fact Discovery Cutoff May 4, 2012 July 13, 2012 By and through their respective ...