From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cytosport, Inc. v. Monster Muscle, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 4, 2011
Case No.: 2:11-CV-01147-WBS-DAD (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2011)

Opinion

Case No.: 2:11-CV-01147-WBS-DAD

08-04-2011

CYTOSPORT, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. MONSTER MUSCLE, INC., a New York business entity; and DOES 1-10, Defendants.

Peter M. de Jonge Jed H. Hansen THORPE NORTH & WESTERN, L.L.P. -and- MILLSTONE, PETERSON & WATTS, LLP Attorneys at Law By: GLENN W. PETERSON Attorneys for Plaintiff CytoSport, Inc.


Glenn W. Peterson, Esq. (SBN 126173)

MILLSTONE, PETERSON & WATTS, LLP

2267 Lava Ridge Court, Suite 210

Roseville, CA 95661

Telephone: (916) 780-8222

Fax No: (916) 780-8775

Peter M. de Jonge, Esq. (Utah SBN 7185)

Jed H. Hansen, Esq. (Utah SBN 10679)

THORPE NORTH & WESTERN, LLP

8180 South 700 East, Suite 350

Sandy, Utah 84070-0562

Telephone: (801) 566-6633

Facsimile: (801) 566-0750

Attorneys for Plaintiff

CytoSport, Inc.

APPLICATION TO CONTINUE JOINT SCHEDULING CONFERENCE;

ORDER CONTINUING JOINT SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

Senior United States District Judge

William B. Shubb

APPLICATION

By order dated April 28, 2011, this matter was set for an Initial Scheduling Conference to be heard on August 22, 2011 at 2:00 p.m.

Immediately after this action was filed, defendant was contacted through counsel. A settlement dialogue ensued, and has continued in earnest since the initial contact was made. Those discussions have matured to the point where a settlement agreement has been drafted by plaintiff's counsel and is under review and consideration by the defendant. We are hopeful that the matter will be resolved without the necessity of an appearance by defendant. While recognizing that we are in arrears of the court-ordered schedule for a Joint Status Report, we believe that these circumstances warrant a 60-day postponement of the Pretrial Scheduling Conference, and respectfully request that the Court order that the scheduling conference be continued for approximately 60 days. We are hopeful that a voluntary dismissal will precede the new conference date.

Peter M. de Jonge

Jed H. Hansen

THORPE NORTH & WESTERN, L.L.P.

-and

MILLSTONE, PETERSON & WATTS, LLP

Attorneys at Law

By: GLENN W. PETERSON

Attorneys for Plaintiff

CytoSport, Inc.

I hereby attest that I have on file all holograph signatures for any signatures indicated by a "conformed" signature (/s/) within this e-filed document.

MILLSTONE PETERSON & WATTS, LLP

Glenn W. Peterson

ORDER

Based upon the foregoing application, and good cause appearing, the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference in this matter is continued to October 31, 2011, at 2:00 p.m. If joint scheduling remains an issue at that time, a joint scheduling report shall be filed no later than seven (7) days prior to the conference date.

SO ORDERED.

WILLIAM B. SHUBB

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Cytosport, Inc. v. Monster Muscle, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 4, 2011
Case No.: 2:11-CV-01147-WBS-DAD (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2011)
Case details for

Cytosport, Inc. v. Monster Muscle, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:CYTOSPORT, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. MONSTER MUSCLE…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Aug 4, 2011

Citations

Case No.: 2:11-CV-01147-WBS-DAD (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2011)