ADAPTIX, INC. v. AT&T, INC., 3:13-cv-01778-NC. (2013)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20130521821
Visitors: 8
Filed: May 20, 2013
Latest Update: May 20, 2013
Summary: STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE NATHANAEL COUSINS, Magistrate Judge. Pursuant to Rule 6(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Civil L.R. 6-2, the parties hereto stipulate to this joint request for a continuance of the Initial Case Management Conference currently set for May 29, 2013. The parties request that the CMC be continued to Wednesday, July 17, 2013. In support of this stipulated request, the parties state as follows: 1. This case is one of six ca
Summary: STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE NATHANAEL COUSINS, Magistrate Judge. Pursuant to Rule 6(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Civil L.R. 6-2, the parties hereto stipulate to this joint request for a continuance of the Initial Case Management Conference currently set for May 29, 2013. The parties request that the CMC be continued to Wednesday, July 17, 2013. In support of this stipulated request, the parties state as follows: 1. This case is one of six cas..
More
STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
NATHANAEL COUSINS, Magistrate Judge.
Pursuant to Rule 6(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Civil L.R. 6-2, the parties hereto stipulate to this joint request for a continuance of the Initial Case Management Conference currently set for May 29, 2013. The parties request that the CMC be continued to Wednesday, July 17, 2013.
In support of this stipulated request, the parties state as follows:
1. This case is one of six cases, all recently transferred to this District, for which an Administrative Motion to Consider Cases Related is currently pending before Judge Hamilton. (See Dkt. No. 31 in Case No. 3:13-cv-01774-PJH.) The cases in question (including this case) are:
a. Adaptix v. Motorola Mobility LLC, et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-1774-PJH (N.D. Cal.)
b. Adaptix v. Apple Inc., et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-1776-NC (N.D. Cal.)
c. Adaptix v. Apple Inc., et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-1777-MMC (N.D. Cal.)
d. Adaptix v. AT&T Mobility LLC, et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-1778-NC (N.D. Cal.)
e. Adaptix v. HTC Corp., et al., Case No. 5:13-cv-1844-PSG (N.D. Cal.)
f. Adaptix v. Apple Inc., et al., Case No. 4:13-cv-2023-EMC (N.D. Cal.)
2. The Administrative Motion To Consider Cases Related is unopposed. In the event that the Administrative Motion is granted, the parties' understanding is that this case may be assigned to another judge who would set his or her own CMC date. (See Declaration of Daniel M. Shafer ["Shafer Decl."] filed herewith.)
3. There have been no previous time modifications requested by the parties in this case. The CMC date in question was modified once by the Court acting sua sponte. (Dkt. 69.) There are currently no scheduled dates in the case subsequent to the CMC in question, so the requested modification will have no further effect on the case schedule. (Shafer Decl.)
WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request, in the interest of efficiency, that the upcoming CMC currently set for May 29, 2013, be continued until Wednesday, July 17, 2013, pending the Court's decision on the Administrative Motion to Consider Cases Related, and that the related deadlines originally set forth in the Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference and ADR Deadlines (Dkt. No. 66) also be continued accordingly.
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
