The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. William B. Shubb
Gregg A. Rapoport (SBN 136941) BUSINESS LEGAL PARTNERS 2 135 W. Green Street, Suite 100 Pasadena, CA 91105 3 Direct Tel. 626-585-0155 Fax. 626-578-1827 email@example.com 4 Attorneys for Defendants 5 SKYLUX INC., MUJEEB PUZHAKKARAILLATH, and SKYLUX TELELINK PVT LTD 6 7
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANTS' RESPONSES TO THE FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT [Proposed Order Lodged] Date: No Hearing Set Time: Ctrm: 5
Plaintiffs Mohit Randhawa and Shannon Callnet Pvt Ltd. (together, "Plaintiffs") and Defendants Skylux Inc., Skylux Telelink Pvt Ltd., and Mujeeb Puzhakkaraillath (together, the "Skylux Defendants") hereby submit the following Stipulation, and for good cause request the Court's approval thereof:
1. This action was commenced in state court on May 27, 2009, and was removed to this Court on August 20, 2009.
2. Plaintiffs filed a Fourth Amended Complaint on August 10, 2010. (Docket 2 No. 86).
3. On September 5, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a motion to stay the entire action pending arbitration between Plaintiff Shannon Callnet and Defendant Interactive Intelligence, Inc. (Docket No. 88.)
4. On September 8 and 9, 2010, defendants filed motions to dismiss the Fourth 7 Amended Complaint. (Docket Nos. 90, 91.)
5. On October 12, 2010, the Court heard oral argument on the motions to 9 dismiss, as well as on Plaintiffs' motion to stay the action. (Docket No. 101.)
6. On October 18, 2010, the Court granted Plaintiffs' motion to stay the entire action pending completion of arbitration. (Docket No. 102.) As to the 13 claims against the Skylux Defendants, the Court found that the "arbitrable 14 claims against Interactive and non-arbitrable claims against the Skylux 15 defendants sufficiently overlap in law and fact to suggest that the rest of the 16 claims should be stayed." The Court then stated that it "will grant 17 Shannon's Callnet's motion to stay the claims against the Skylux defendants and thus deny the Skylux defendants' motion to dismiss." (Id. at 7:13-27.)
7. On December 9, 2011, the Court ruled: "As it appears that the action will be 20 19 in arbitration for the foreseeable future, this case shall be ordered 21 administratively closed." (Docket No. 123 at 2:18-20.) The Court stayed all proceedings. (Id. at 2:27-28.)
8. On July 12, 2012, Interactive moved to vacate the stay and confirm its 24 23 arbitration award against Plaintiff Shannon Callnet. (Docket No. 124.)
9. On August 3, 2012, the Court ordered the stay be lifted. (Docket No. 131.) 26
The Court further set for a Status Conference for September 4, 2012 "to address the remaining claims ...