Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Toppan Photomasks, Inc. v. Park, 3:13-cv-3323 MMC. (2014)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20140512j29 Visitors: 6
Filed: May 09, 2014
Latest Update: May 09, 2014
Summary: AMENDED STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER MAXINE M. CHESNEY, District Judge. STIPULATION Plaintiff Toppan Photomasks, Inc. (TPI) and Defendant Keun Taek Park (collectively "the Parties"), participated in a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Corley on April 28, 2014 where progress was made toward resolving this matter. In order to facilitate further settlement discussions, the Parties stipulate and request that the following dates in the Pretria
More

AMENDED STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER

MAXINE M. CHESNEY, District Judge.

STIPULATION

Plaintiff Toppan Photomasks, Inc. (TPI) and Defendant Keun Taek Park (collectively "the Parties"), participated in a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Corley on April 28, 2014 where progress was made toward resolving this matter. In order to facilitate further settlement discussions, the Parties stipulate and request that the following dates in the Pretrial Preparation Order (Dkt. No. 53) and Stipulation and Order Regarding Discovery (Dkt. No. 77) be modified as follows:

• Non-Expert Discovery Cutoff extended from June 9, 2014 to July 11, 2014; • Designation of Experts extended from June 9, 2014 to August 1, 2014; • Designation of Rebuttal Experts extended from June 23, 2014 to August 29, 2104; • Expert Discovery Cutoff extended from July 7, 2014 to August 29, 2014; • Dispositive Motions filing deadline extended from July 18, 2014 to September 19, 2014; • Meet and Confer (Civil Local Rule 16-10(b)(5)) extended from September 22, 2104 to December 9, 2014; • Pretrial Conference Date extended from October 28, 2104 at 3:00 pm to April 7, 2015 at 3:00 pm; • Jury Trial Date extended from November 10, 2014 at 9:00 am to April 20, 2015 at 9:00 am, Courtroom 7, 19th Floor.

The Parties further stipulate and request that

(a) prior to May 28, 2014, the Parties will serve no additional discovery on each other;

(b) that the Parties may nonetheless follow-up on incomplete discovery already served on each other; and

(c) this stipulation is not intended to affect Magistrate Judge Spero's determination of when to schedule a hearing on Plaintiff's pending Motion for Sanctions. Plaintiff requests that a hearing be set at the Court's earliest convenience.

So stipulated.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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