From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Uromed Tech. Inc. v. Granger

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 19, 2011
Case No. C10-05242 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 19, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. C10-05242

10-19-2011

UROMED TECHNOLOGY, INC., et al. Plaintiffs, v. MICHAEL Y. GRANGER, et al. Defendants.

Steven Rood, Esq., Bar No. 69332 LAW OFFICE OF STEVEN ROOD Counsel for Defendants William Acevedo (Bar No. 194106) WENDEL, ROSEN, BLACK & DEAN LLP Counsel for Plaintiffs


STIPULATION TO CONTINUE BRIEFING AND HEARING DATES RE: CONTINGENT MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE COUNTERCLAIM, MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON PLEADINGS, AND CONTINGENT MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND PROPOSED ORDER

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between all of the attorneys of record of the parties who have appeared in this action, that the Defendants Kenneth E. Feltman's, Michael Y. Granger's, and Kenneth Feltman Insurance Trust's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Dismissing Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, Contingent Motion for Leave to File Counterclaim, and Contingent Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, currently scheduled for hearing on November 3, 2011 at 11:00, Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler presiding, be postponed and continued for hearing until December 15, 2011 at 11:00 a.m, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard by this Court. Plaintiffs' deadline to file any opposition to Defendants' motions shall be continued from November 14, 2011 to December 1, 2011 or to such date as appropriate based upon the hearing date for the motions provided by the Court. Defendants' deadline to file any reply to said opposition shall be continued from November 21, 2011 to December 8, 2011 or to such date as appropriate based upon the hearing date for the motions provided by the Court.

Said continuance is desired to allow the parties sufficient time to concentrate on finalizing a tentative settlement reached during the settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu. Plaintiff UroMed Technology, Inc. is pursuing outside financing to fund said settlement, but requires additional time to determine whether such financing will materialize.

Steven Rood, Esq., Bar No. 69332

LAW OFFICE OF STEVEN ROOD

Counsel for Defendants

William Acevedo (Bar No. 194106)

WENDEL, ROSEN, BLACK & DEAN LLP

Counsel for Plaintiffs

ORDER

Based on the Stipulation of the parties, and for good cause appearing, the hearing of Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Dismissing Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, Contingent Motion for Leave to File Counterclaim, and Contingent Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, is continued from November 3, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. in Department 4 of this Court to December 15, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. in Department 4 of this Court. Plaintiffs' opposition, if any, to said motions shall be filed no later than November , 2011. Defendants' reply, if any, to said opposition shall be filed no later than December 1, 2011.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Uromed Tech. Inc. v. Granger

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 19, 2011
Case No. C10-05242 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 19, 2011)
Case details for

Uromed Tech. Inc. v. Granger

Case Details

Full title:UROMED TECHNOLOGY, INC., et al. Plaintiffs, v. MICHAEL Y. GRANGER, et al…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Oct 19, 2011

Citations

Case No. C10-05242 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 19, 2011)