From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Techcrunch, Inc. v. Fusion Garage Pte. Ltd.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 29, 2011
Case No. 3:09-cv-05812 RS (PSG) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 29, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. 3:09-cv-05812 RS (PSG)

11-29-2011

TECHCRUNCH, INC., et al. Plaintiffs, v. FUSION GARAGE PTE. LTD., Defendant.

David S. Bloch (SBN: 184530) WINSTON & STRAWN LLP Attorneys for Plaintiffs QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Claude M. Stern (Bar No. 96737) Evette Pennypacker (Bar No. 203515) Thomas R. Watson (Bar No. 227264) Attorneys for Defendant


David S. Bloch (SBN: 184530)

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP

Claude M. Stern (Bar No. 96737)

Evette Pennypacker (Bar No. 203515)

Thomas R. Watson (Bar No. 227264)

Attorneys for Defendant

ORDER MODIFYING

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING HEARING DATE

ON FUSION GARAGE'S MOTION TO COMPEL

Pursuant to the Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal's December 2010 Standing Order, the parties stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS, Defendant Fusion Garage PTE Ltd. ("Fusion Garage") filed a Motion to Compel on September 9, 2011, which was scheduled to be heard on October 18, 2011 ("Motion") (Dkt. 212);

WHEREAS, the parties engaged in private mediation on September 21, 2011, and executed a Memorandum of Understanding regarding final settlement of this case at the mediation;

WHEREAS, the parties sought a stay pending the execution of a definitive agreement, which was granted by Judge Richard Seeborg on September 23, 2011 (Dkt. 216);

WHEREAS, the parties were unable to reach a final agreement regarding settlement despite lengthy and good faith settlement negotiations (Dkt. 217, 219, 220);

WHEREAS, the parties have meet and conferred regarding deadlines, motions, and other activities, and have agreed that Plaintiffs TechCrunch, Inc. and CrunchPad, Inc.'s (collectively, Plaintiffs") opposition to the Motion will be due on December 2, 2011 and Fusion Garage's reply will be due on December 9, 2011;

WHEREAS, Judge Richard Seeborg agreed, inter alia, to the parties' stipulated briefing schedule and directed the parties to this Court to set the hearing date for the Motion (Dkt. 222);

WHEREAS, the parties have met and conferred and agreed to have the Motion heard on December 20, 2011, the Court's schedule permitting;

NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated by the undersigned counsel on behalf of the parties identified below pursuant to Magistrate Judge Grewal's December 2010 Standing Order that, subject to Court approval, Fusion Garage's Motion to Compel (Dkt. 212) shall be heard on December 20, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. in the Courtroom of the Honorable Paul S. Grewal of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, or as soon thereafter as the matter can be heard.

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP

By: David S. Bloch

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP

By: Evette D. Pennypacker

Attorneys for Defendant
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED:

The motion to compel (Docket No. 212) shall be heard on January 3, 2012 at 10AM.

The Honorable Paul S. Grewal

United States District Court Magistrate Judge

ATTESTATION

I, Evette D. Pennypacker, hereby attest, pursuant to N.D. Cal. General Order No. 45, that I have obtained the concurrence to the filing of this document of each signatory hereto.

By: Evette D. Pennypacker


Summaries of

Techcrunch, Inc. v. Fusion Garage Pte. Ltd.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 29, 2011
Case No. 3:09-cv-05812 RS (PSG) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 29, 2011)
Case details for

Techcrunch, Inc. v. Fusion Garage Pte. Ltd.

Case Details

Full title:TECHCRUNCH, INC., et al. Plaintiffs, v. FUSION GARAGE PTE. LTD., Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Date published: Nov 29, 2011

Citations

Case No. 3:09-cv-05812 RS (PSG) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 29, 2011)