Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

FOX FACTORY, INC. v. CANE CREEK CYCLING COMPONENTS, INC., 4:13-cv-04061-SBA. (2013)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20131231b92 Visitors: 1
Filed: Dec. 30, 2013
Latest Update: Dec. 30, 2013
Summary: UNOPPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST TO RESCHEDULE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; DECLARATION OF ROBERT F. MCCAULEY; ORDER SAUNDRA B. ARMSTRONG, District Judge. Plaintiffs Fox Factory, Inc. and Fox Factory Holding Corp. ("Fox") respectfully request that the Court reschedule the Initial Case Management Conference ("CMC") in this case, currently set for January 8, 2014, to February 5, 2014, at a time convenient for the Court. Counsel for Defendant Cane Creek Cycling Components, Inc. ("Cane Creek")
More

UNOPPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST TO RESCHEDULE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE;

DECLARATION OF ROBERT F. MCCAULEY;

ORDER

SAUNDRA B. ARMSTRONG, District Judge.

Plaintiffs Fox Factory, Inc. and Fox Factory Holding Corp. ("Fox") respectfully request that the Court reschedule the Initial Case Management Conference ("CMC") in this case, currently set for January 8, 2014, to February 5, 2014, at a time convenient for the Court. Counsel for Defendant Cane Creek Cycling Components, Inc. ("Cane Creek") has advised that Cane Creek does not oppose Fox's request to continue the Initial CMC. The Court previously rescheduled the CMC from November 27, 2013, to January 8, 2014, in view of settlement discussions.

On December 24, 2013, the parties filed a Stipulation and Proposed Order requesting additional time, until January 23, 2014, for Fox to formally serve the Complaint.1 As stated in that Stipulation, the parties have engaged in earnest settlement negotiations, have agreed in correspondence upon basic terms for settlement, and have exchanged at least one draft settlement agreement. To allow those discussions to continue and possibly resolve this action without further involvement of the Court, Fox respectfully requests (and Cane Creek does not oppose) that the CMC be continued to February 5, 2014. Deferring the CMC would provide the parties additional time to finalize and execute their settlement agreement.

Fox also requests that the following deadlines be reset as provided below:

Event Current Deadline Proposed Deadline ADR Forms December 18, 2013 January 26, 2014 Meet and Confer (Rule 26(f)) December 18, 2013 January 23, 2014 Joint CMC Statement December 31, 2013 January 29, 2014 Initial Disclosures December 31, 2013 January 29, 2014

SUPPORTING DECLARATION OF ROBERT F. McCAULEY

I am an attorney licensed to practice before the courts of the State of California and in this District. I am a member of the law firm of Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP, attorneys of record for Fox. All representations made above in this Administrative Request are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Pursuant to a Stipulation and Proposed Order, the Court previously rescheduled the Initial CMC from November 27, 2013 to January 8, 2014, in view of ongoing settlement discussions. Other than the deadlines described in the Administrative Request above, no Court deadlines would be affected by the granting of this Request (as no other dates have been set by the Court).

By my signature below, I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct.

ORDER

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, it is hereby ORDERED that the telephonic Initial Case Management Conference is rescheduled for February 5, 2014, at 2:30 p.m. Plaintiffs' counsel to set up the conference call with all parties on the line and call chambers at (510) 637-3559.

The Court also adopts the following schedule:

Event Deadline ADR Forms January 26, 2014 Meet and Confer (Rule January 23, 2014 26(f)) Joint CMC Statement January 29, 2014 Initial Disclosures January 29, 2014

FootNotes


1. Defendant Cane Creek was provided a courtesy copy of the Summons and Complaint at or near the date of filing, as well as the Court's scheduling order, but has not yet been formally served while the parties are pursuing settlement discussions.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer