SYNOPSYS, INC. v. ATOPTECH, INC., 13-cv-02965-MMC (DMR). (2016)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20160628b23
Visitors: 10
Filed: Jun. 27, 2016
Latest Update: Jun. 27, 2016
Summary: ORDER RE: DEPOSITION OF STEVEN MEIER; REQUESTING RESPONSE FROM ATOPTECH Re: Dkt. No. 775 DONNA M. RYU , Magistrate Judge . On June 27, 2016, Synopsys filed a unilateral discovery letter seeking to quash a subpoena that purports to set a June 28, 2016 deposition for Mr. Steven Meier. [Docket No. 775.] Synopsys contends that the deposition subpoena is invalid, and also violates the court's scheduling order, which set a June 30, 2015 discovery deadline for the copyright portion of the case.
Summary: ORDER RE: DEPOSITION OF STEVEN MEIER; REQUESTING RESPONSE FROM ATOPTECH Re: Dkt. No. 775 DONNA M. RYU , Magistrate Judge . On June 27, 2016, Synopsys filed a unilateral discovery letter seeking to quash a subpoena that purports to set a June 28, 2016 deposition for Mr. Steven Meier. [Docket No. 775.] Synopsys contends that the deposition subpoena is invalid, and also violates the court's scheduling order, which set a June 30, 2015 discovery deadline for the copyright portion of the case. A..
More
ORDER RE: DEPOSITION OF STEVEN MEIER; REQUESTING RESPONSE FROM ATOPTECH
Re: Dkt. No. 775
DONNA M. RYU, Magistrate Judge.
On June 27, 2016, Synopsys filed a unilateral discovery letter seeking to quash a subpoena that purports to set a June 28, 2016 deposition for Mr. Steven Meier. [Docket No. 775.] Synopsys contends that the deposition subpoena is invalid, and also violates the court's scheduling order, which set a June 30, 2015 discovery deadline for the copyright portion of the case.
ATopTech is hereby ordered to file a response of no more than two pages by 5:00 p.m. on June 28, 2016.
The deposition of Steven Meier shall not go forward until the court resolves this dispute.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
