Luxul Technology Inc. v. Nectarlux, LLC, 14-CV-03656-LHK. (2016)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20160601891
Visitors: 6
Filed: May 31, 2016
Latest Update: May 31, 2016
Summary: CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER LUCY H. KOH , District Judge . Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds the pending motions for summary judgment (ECF Nos. 93, 94) suitable for decision without oral argument and hereby VACATES the hearing set for June 2, 2016. The Court CONTINUES the case management conference set for June 2, 2016 to July 7, 2016 at 1:30 p.m., concurrent with the pretrial conference. The parties' motions in limine are due June 23, 2016. The parties are limited to 4 motion
Summary: CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER LUCY H. KOH , District Judge . Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds the pending motions for summary judgment (ECF Nos. 93, 94) suitable for decision without oral argument and hereby VACATES the hearing set for June 2, 2016. The Court CONTINUES the case management conference set for June 2, 2016 to July 7, 2016 at 1:30 p.m., concurrent with the pretrial conference. The parties' motions in limine are due June 23, 2016. The parties are limited to 4 motions..
More
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
LUCY H. KOH, District Judge.
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds the pending motions for summary judgment (ECF Nos. 93, 94) suitable for decision without oral argument and hereby VACATES the hearing set for June 2, 2016. The Court CONTINUES the case management conference set for June 2, 2016 to July 7, 2016 at 1:30 p.m., concurrent with the pretrial conference.
The parties' motions in limine are due June 23, 2016. The parties are limited to 4 motions in limine per side. The motions in limine and oppositions shall not exceed 3 pages each. There will be no replies.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
