POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC. v. FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR INTERNATIONAL, INC., C 09-5235-MMC (MEJ). (2013)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20131004d24
Visitors: 15
Filed: Oct. 01, 2013
Latest Update: Oct. 01, 2013
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING THE DATE OF THE HEARING ON DISPOSITIVE/ DAUBERT MOTIONS FOR NOVEMBER 8, 2013 MAXINE M. CHESNEY, District Judge. Pursuant to the Court's scheduling order (Dkt. No. 224), the hearing date for the parties' dispositive and Daubert motions is currently set for November 1, 2013, or at the Court's convenience thereafter. Due to scheduling issues resulting in the unavailability of Fairchild's counsel, the parties stipulate and hereby seek the Court
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING THE DATE OF THE HEARING ON DISPOSITIVE/ DAUBERT MOTIONS FOR NOVEMBER 8, 2013 MAXINE M. CHESNEY, District Judge. Pursuant to the Court's scheduling order (Dkt. No. 224), the hearing date for the parties' dispositive and Daubert motions is currently set for November 1, 2013, or at the Court's convenience thereafter. Due to scheduling issues resulting in the unavailability of Fairchild's counsel, the parties stipulate and hereby seek the Court'..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING THE DATE OF THE HEARING ON DISPOSITIVE/DAUBERT MOTIONS FOR NOVEMBER 8, 2013
MAXINE M. CHESNEY, District Judge.
Pursuant to the Court's scheduling order (Dkt. No. 224), the hearing date for the parties' dispositive and Daubert motions is currently set for November 1, 2013, or at the Court's convenience thereafter. Due to scheduling issues resulting in the unavailability of Fairchild's counsel, the parties stipulate and hereby seek the Court's approval to move the date of the dispositive/Daubert motion hearing to November 8, 2013. This scheduling change will not impact any other deadlines in this case.
Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B) regarding signatures, I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from counsel for Plaintiff.
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
