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.

Ooyala, Inc. A California Corporation v. Brand

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 19, 2012

OOYALA, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF,
v.
BRAND TECHNOLOGIES, INC., DBA GOSSIPCENTER.COM, AN OHIO CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Hon. Howard R. Lloyd

*E-FILED: April 19, 2012*

JOINT STIPULATION AND REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE UNTIL AFTER MEDIATION; [PROPOSED] ORDER [Re: Docket No. 12]

Date: May 1, 2012 Time: 1:30 p.m.

Action Filed: January 20, 2012 Trial Date: Not Set

Quintana Law Group, APC

Pursuant to Northern District Local Rule 16-2(d) and (e) and Rule 7-12, Plaintiff Ooyala, Inc. ("Plaintiff"), and Defendant Brand Technologies, Inc. ("Defendant"), through their respective 3 counsel, respectfully submit this joint stipulation and request for continuance of the May 1, 2012 Case Management Conference, based on the following:. 5 7 to mediate their dispute before a mutually agreeable Court Neutral from the Court's panel or a 8

RECITALS

1. The parties have met and conferred pursuant to ADR L.R. 3-5(a) and have agreed Court Neutral appointed by the Court. Further, the parties have agreed to conduct the mediation 9 on one of the following dates: June 24, 25, 26, 27, or July 10, 11, 2012.

2. On April 11, 2012, Defendant filed its ADR Certification as required under ADR L.R. 3-5(b).

3. On April 12, 2011, Plaintiff filed its ADR Certification as required under ADR L.R. 3-5(b).

4. On April 16, 2012, the parties filed a Stipulation and (Proposed) Order Selecting ADR Process, whereby they agreed to mediate their dispute before a mediator. 16 16

5. Also on April 16, 2012, the parties filed their Consent To Proceed Before United States Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd. 18 18 19 19 place on May 1, 2012 at 1:30 p.m. before Magistrate Judge Lloyd. 20 20 21 21 upcoming mediation. Further, pending the Court's approval, in the interest of saving time, 22 22 expense and the Court's resources, the parties believe that a brief continuance of the Initial Case 23 23 Management Conference and associated deadlines, including Rule 26(a) and (f) disclosures and 24 24 conferences, would be beneficial to the parties' efforts to mediate this matter by July 14, 2012 in 25 25 San Jose, California. This is particularly important for Defendant since: (i) it is an Ohio 26 26 corporation with its principle place of business in Toledo, Ohio, and its authorized corporate 27 27 officer will be traveling to the mediation from Ohio; and (2) Defendant's lead counsel is based in 28 28 Los Angeles County and will be traveling from Los Angeles County to the mediation.

6. The Initial Case Management Conference in this matter is presently set to take

7. The parties have agreed that formal discovery is not necessary in advance of the Plaintiff and Defendant therefore respectfully request that the Court grant a continuance of 2 the May 1, 2012 Case Management Conference to July 24, 2012 or any date thereafter that is 3 convenient for the Court's calendar, by signing the Proposed Order filed herewith. 4

STIPULATION

Based on the foregoing Recitals, and subject to this Court's approval, Plaintiff and Defendant agree and stipulate as follows: 7

1. The Initial Case Management Conference presently scheduled for May 1, 2012 at 6 1:30 p.m. shall be continued to July 24, 2012 at 1:30 p.m. or any convenient date thereafter; 9

2. The parties shall submit a joint case management statement seven (7) days in advance of the date of the further case management conference;

3. The parties shall have completed mediation of this matter by July 14, 2012; and

4. All deadlines related to the Initial Case Management Conference date, including Rule 26(a) and (f) disclosures and conferences, shall be reset to coordinate with the new initial 14 14 case management conference date set by the Court. 15 15

IT SO STIPULATED.

DATED: April 17, 2012 LAW OFFICES OF MARTIN D. GOODMAN By: /s/ Martin D. Goodman Martin D. Goodman, Esq. AKAY SULL LLP Douglas N. Akay, Esq. Harjit K. Sull, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff Ooyala, Inc. DATED: April 17, 2012 QUINTANA LAW GROUP, APC By: /s/ Andres F. Quintana Andres F. Quintana, Esq. Attorneys for Defendant Brand Technologies, Inc.

ATTESTATION OF FILING

Pursuant to General Order 45.X.B, I attest that I have obtained concurrence in the filing of 3 this document from the parties listed above. 4

/s/ Andres F. Quintana

Andres F. Quintana

ORDER

PURSUANT TO THE FOREGOING STIPULATION, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 8

1. The Initial Case Management Conference presently scheduled for May 1, 2012 at 1:30 p.m. shall be continued to July 24, 2012 at 1:30 p.m. [or ___________, 2012 at 1:30 p.m. ]; 10 10

2. The parties shall submit a joint case management statement 7 days in advance of 11 11 the date of the further case management conference; and 12

3. All deadlines related to the initial case management conference date, including Rule 26(a) and (f) disclosures and conferences, shall be reset to coordinate with the new initial 14 14 case management conference date set by the Court. 15 15

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

By:

Hon. Howard R. Lloyd United States Magistrate Judge

20120419

© 1992-2012 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.