From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

VIA Techs. Inc. v. SonicBlue Claims, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION
Nov 16, 2011
Case No. 09-cv-02109 PJH (N.D. Cal. Nov. 16, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. 09-cv-02109 PJH

11-16-2011

VIA TECHNOLOGIES INC., a Taiwan corporation Plaintiff, v. SONICBLUE CLAIMS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; FERRY CLAIMS, LLC, a California limited liability company; and FREEFALL CLAIMS I, LLC, a California limited liability company, Defendants.

JONATHAN R. BASS (State Bar No. 75779) BRIAN J. SCHMIDT (State Bar No. 265937) COBLENTZ, PATCH, DUFFY & BASS LLP Attorneys for Defendants SONICBLUE CLAIMS, LLC, FERRY CLAIMS, LLC, and FREEFALL CLAIMS I, LLC Daniel A. Zlatnik Attorneys for Plaintiff VIA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


JONATHAN R. BASS (State Bar No. 75779)

BRIAN J. SCHMIDT (State Bar No. 265937)

COBLENTZ, PATCH, DUFFY & BASS LLP

Attorneys for Defendants SONICBLUE

CLAIMS, LLC, FERRY CLAIMS, LLC, and

FREEFALL CLAIMS I, LLC

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER VACATING HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT

Date: December 14, 2011

Time: 9:00 a.m.

Place: Courtroom 3 (Judge Hamilton)

1301 Clay Street

Oakland, CA

Trial Date: January 21, 2013

STIPULATION

The undersigned parties stipulate as follows:

1. The December 14, 2011 hearing on the motion of defendant SonicBlue Claims, LLC ("SBC") for leave to file a third-party complaint is vacated, and briefing on the motion is suspended;

2. SBC may re-notice its motion for hearing on any Wednesday in January or February, 2012; except for January 4 or 11, 2012.

3. No party shall argue that the period of time between December 14, 2011 and the re-noticed hearing date renders the motion untimely or has caused any party to suffer prejudice; and

4. The briefing schedule on any re-noticed motion shall proceed as if the re-notice were a newly filed motion.

I, Jonathan R. Bass, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order. Pursuant to General Order 45, I hereby attest that Daniel A. Zlatnik has concurred in this filing.

COBLENTZ, PATCH, DUFFY & BASS LLP

Jonathan R. Bass

Attorneys for Defendants SONICBLUE

CLAIMS, LLC, FERRY CLAIMS, LLC, and

FREEFALL CLAIMS I, LLC

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

Daniel A. Zlatnik

Attorneys for Plaintiff VIA TECHNOLOGIES,

INC.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton


Summaries of

VIA Techs. Inc. v. SonicBlue Claims, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION
Nov 16, 2011
Case No. 09-cv-02109 PJH (N.D. Cal. Nov. 16, 2011)
Case details for

VIA Techs. Inc. v. SonicBlue Claims, LLC

Case Details

Full title:VIA TECHNOLOGIES INC., a Taiwan corporation Plaintiff, v. SONICBLUE…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION

Date published: Nov 16, 2011

Citations

Case No. 09-cv-02109 PJH (N.D. Cal. Nov. 16, 2011)