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.

Ripple Labs, Inc. v. Lacore Enterprises, LLC

United States District Court, N.D. California

January 30, 2014

RIPPLE LABS, INC., F/K/A OPENCOIN, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, Plaintiff,
v.
LACORE ENTERPRISES, LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; RIPPLN, INC., A TEXAS CORPORATION; AND TERRY LACORE, AN INDIVIDUAL, Defendants.

Jennifer Seraphine TURNER BOYD LLP Redwood City, California

Todd M. Malynn FELDMAN GALE, P.A. Los Angeles, California Attorneys for Plaintiff

Karl S. Kronenberger Jeffrey M. Rosenfeld KRONENBERGER ROSENFELD, LLP San Francisco, California Attorneys for Defendants

STIPULATION REGARDING DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND BRIEFING AND HEARING SCHEDULE FOR PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

RICHARD SEEBORG, District Judge.

Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, Plaintiff Ripple Labs, Inc. and Defendants LaCore Enterprises, LLC, Rippln, Inc., and Terry LaCore (collectively, the "Parties"), hereby respectfully request by Stipulation that the Court extend the time for Defendants to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint (D.E. 1) and extend the briefing schedule and hearing on Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction (D.E. 4).

Plaintiff filed its Complaint and Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and supporting papers, on December 27, 2013. Defendants previously filed an Unopposed Motion to Extend the Deadline for Defendants to Respond to Complaint and Briefing and Hearing Schedule for Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (D.E. 14). The Court granted that motion (D.E. 16), and the current schedule calls for Defendants to respond to the Complaint and file their opposition to Plaintiff's preliminary injunction motion on February 6, for Plaintiff to file its reply in support of the preliminary injunction motion on February 13, and sets the hearing on Plaintiff's preliminary injunction motion for February 20.

The Parties have entered into discussions that may resolve or limit the issues that need to be presented to the Court in this matter, and request a brief extension of these deadlines to continue those discussions. Specifically, the Parties request a one-week extension of the deadline for Defendant to respond to the Complaint and the briefing schedule on the preliminary injunction motion, and a two-week extension of the hearing date on that motion:

February 13 Defendants to respond to Complaint (D.E. 1)
February 13 Defendants to file opposition to preliminary injunction motion (D.E. 4)
February 20 Plaintiff to file reply in support of preliminary injunction motion (D.E. 4)
March 6 Hearing on Motion for Preliminary Injunction (D.E. 4)

The Parties agree that Plaintiff does not and will not waive any rights or make any concessions regarding the seriousness or immediacy of its preliminary injunction motion and that Defendants will make no arguments to the contrary based on Plaintiff's stipulation to the extension of these deadlines.

For the reasons set forth herein, the Parties respectfully request that the Court extend the deadlines on extend the time for Defendants to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint and extend the briefing schedule and hearing on Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction as set forth herein.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.