hiQ LABS, INC. v. LinkedIN CORP., 3:17-cv-03301-EMC. (2017)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20170616974
Visitors: 10
Filed: Jun. 15, 2017
Latest Update: Jun. 15, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR BRIEFING ON TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . Plaintiff hiQ Labs, Inc. ("hiQ") and Defendant LinkedIn Corporation hereby stipulate as follows: 1. On June 9, 2017 hiQ withdrew its ex parte application for temporary restraining order and order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not issue (D.I. 3), without prejudice, to allow discussions between the parties. 2. As those discussions have not achieved a resolution of this m
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR BRIEFING ON TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . Plaintiff hiQ Labs, Inc. ("hiQ") and Defendant LinkedIn Corporation hereby stipulate as follows: 1. On June 9, 2017 hiQ withdrew its ex parte application for temporary restraining order and order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not issue (D.I. 3), without prejudice, to allow discussions between the parties. 2. As those discussions have not achieved a resolution of this ma..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR BRIEFING ON TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.
Plaintiff hiQ Labs, Inc. ("hiQ") and Defendant LinkedIn Corporation hereby stipulate as follows:
1. On June 9, 2017 hiQ withdrew its ex parte application for temporary restraining order and order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not issue (D.I. 3), without prejudice, to allow discussions between the parties.
2. As those discussions have not achieved a resolution of this matter, the parties agree to the following schedule:
June 22, 2017, close of business Plaintiff hiQ to file renewed application for
temporary restraining order and order to show cause
why a preliminary injunction should not issue.
June 26, 2017, close of business Defendant LinkedIn Corporation to file an
opposition to said application.
June 27, 2017 Plaintiff hiQ to file a reply brief in support of said
application
June 29, 2017 Proposed Hearing Date
3. The Parties shall promptly inform the Court if circumstances change.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
N.D. Cal. Civil Local Rule 5-1 Attestation
I, C. Brandon Wisoff, am the ECF user whose credentials were utilized in the electronic filing of this document. In accordance with N.D. Cal. Civil Local Rule 5-1, I hereby attest that Jonathan H. Blavin concurred in the filing of this document.
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
