Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

MacDonald v. Dynamic Ledger Solutions, Inc., 3:17-cv-07095-RS. (2018)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20180108612 Visitors: 1
Filed: Jan. 05, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 05, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING SERVICE ON DEFENDANTS RESIDENT OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES (ECF NO. 12) RICHARD SEEBORG , District Judge . WHEREAS plaintiff commenced the above-captioned action on December 13, 2017; WHEREAS on December 14, 2017, plaintiff filed an ex parte application asking the Court to approve electronic service of defendants Tezos Stiftung (the "Foundation"), Johann Gevers, Diego Fernandez, Guido Schmitz-Krummacher, Bitcoin Suisse AG, and Niklas Nikolaj
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING SERVICE ON DEFENDANTS RESIDENT OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES (ECF NO. 12)

WHEREAS plaintiff commenced the above-captioned action on December 13, 2017;

WHEREAS on December 14, 2017, plaintiff filed an ex parte application asking the Court to approve electronic service of defendants Tezos Stiftung (the "Foundation"), Johann Gevers, Diego Fernandez, Guido Schmitz-Krummacher, Bitcoin Suisse AG, and Niklas Nikolajsen (ECF No. 11);

WHEREAS on December 14, 2017, the Court entered an Order approving that request (the "Order") (ECF No. 12);

WHEREAS the undersigned parties have met and conferred regarding the topic of service and the deadline for the undersigned defendants to answer, move to dismiss, or otherwise respond to the complaint;

WHEREAS in order to avoid motion practice with respect to the Order or the issue of service more generally, the Foundation, Mr. Gevers, Mr. Fernandez, Bitcoin Suisse AG, and Mr. Nikolajsen (the "Stipulating Defendants") have agreed to waive service of the summons and complaint, and that they will not contest the validity of such waived service;

WHEREAS in exchange for the Stipulating Defendants' agreement to waive service of the summons and complaint, plaintiff has agreed to join the Stipulating Defendants in requesting that the Court vacate that portion of the Order that allowed for them to be served electronically;

WHEREAS the Stipulating Defendants do not consent to, and in fact contest, the Court's exercise of personal jurisdiction over them as well as the propriety of venue of this action;

WHEREAS this stipulation has no bearing as to the Court's Order as it pertains to any other defendant;

NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned parties hereby request that the Court vacate that portion of its Order that allowed for the Stipulating Defendants to be served electronically, and agree that the Stipulating Defendants' deadline to answer, move to dismiss, or otherwise respond to the complaint shall be March 6, 2018.

SIGNATURE ATTESTATION

Pursuant to Civil L. R. 5-1(i)(3), I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from Reed R. Kathrein and Leo J. Presiado. For signatories not registered via ECF, I hereby attest that I have on file all holographic signatures corresponding to any signatures indicated by a conformed signature (/S/) within this e-filed document.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the Court vacates the portion of its Order dated December 14, 2017 (ECF No. 12) that allowed for electronic service on defendants Tezos Stiftung, Johann Gevers, Diego Fernandez, Bitcoin Suisse AG, and Niklas Nikolajsen. This Order shall have no bearing on the Court's December 14, 2017 (ECF No. 12) Order as it applies to any other defendant. The foregoing defendants' deadline to answer, move to dismiss, or otherwise respond to the complaint shall be March 6, 2018.

PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION, 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