Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Dropbox, Inc. v. Thru Inc., 3:15-CV-01741-EMC (MEJ). (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20161206871 Visitors: 5
Filed: Dec. 05, 2016
Latest Update: Dec. 05, 2016
Summary: Denied STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . Following the Status Conference in this matter on November 22, 2016, counsel for Dropbox, Inc. ("Dropbox") and Thru, Inc. ("Thru") met and conferred regarding a means to resolve efficiently the remaining issue in the case — Dropbox's request for a declaratory judgment that its rights to the term DROPBOX are superior to those ofThru. The parties now agree and stipulate to the following:
More

Denied

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS

Following the Status Conference in this matter on November 22, 2016, counsel for Dropbox, Inc. ("Dropbox") and Thru, Inc. ("Thru") met and conferred regarding a means to resolve efficiently the remaining issue in the case — Dropbox's request for a declaratory judgment that its rights to the term DROPBOX are superior to those ofThru. The parties now agree and stipulate to the following:

1. The parties request that the Court vacate the current date set for a bench trial in this matter of January 23, 2017, the pretrial conference of January 10, 2017, and all associated deadlines.

2. The parties proceeded with a settlement conference with Judge Spero on ovember 29, 2016, and were unable to resolve the matter.

3. The parties request that the Court further consider the alternative grounds advanced by Dropbox in its Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 97) at 10-19, and issue a further order granting or denying the motion on those grounds.

4. If the Court rules that summary judgment for Dropbox is not appropriate on any of the alternative grounds presented, the parties: (i) will meet and confer within seven days of the ruling regarding the most efficient means for the Court to conduct a bench trial on any triable issues of fact that remains (e.g. a trial on documents or a trial with limited witnesses); and (ii) request that the Court schedule a status conference to discuss a schedule and process for trial of any remaining issues.

5. In light of the foregoing, the parties request that the December 8, 2016 status conference that the Court set on November 22 be vacated.

6. If the Court wishes to reset a trial date, the parties respectfully request that it be set no earlier than mid-April 2017.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DENIED. Status conference is reset from 12/8/16 to 12/15/16 at 9:30 a.m. Pretrial filings deadline is extended from 12/13/2016 to 12/22/2016.

[PROPOSED) ORDER

Pursuant to stipulation and good cause appearing, it is so ORDERED:

1. The bench trial set for January 23, 2017, the pretrial conference set for January 10, 2017, and all associated deadlines are vacated;

2. The Court will issue a written order addressing the remaining issues presented in Dropbox's Motion for Summary Judgment and set a Status Conference to discuss a schedule and process for a trial on any remaining issues;

3. If the Court concludes that summary judgment for Dropbox is not appropriate on any of the alternative grounds presented in its motion, the parties (i) wi ll meet and confer within seven days of the Court's ruling on the motion regarding the most efficient means for the Court to conduct a bench trial on any triable issue(s) of fact that remains (e.g. a trial on documents or a trial with limited witnesses); and (ii) the Court will schedule a status conference to discuss a schedule and process for trial ofthe remaining issue(s); and

4. The status conference set for December 8, 2016 is vacated.

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