IO Group, Inc. v. Veoh Networks, Inc. Doc.

12
Case 5:06-cv-03926-HRL Document 12 Filed 09/14/2006 Page 1 of 3

1 Dean A. Morehous (CA Bar No. 111841) dam@thelenreid.com

THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP
2 101 Second Street
Suite 1800
3 San Francisco, CA 94105 *E-FILED ON 9/14/06*
4 Telephone: (415) 371-1200
Facsimile: (415) 371-1211
5
Michael S. Elkin (pro hac vice pending) melkin@thelenreid.com
6 Paul M. Fakler (pro hac vice pending) pfakler@thelenreid.com
THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP
7 875 Third Avenue
New York, New York 10022
8 Telephone: (212) 603-2000
Facsimile: (212) 603-2001
9
Attorneys for Defendant
10 VEOH NETWORKS, INC.

11

12

13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15 SAN JOSE DIVISION

16

17 IO GROUP, INC., a California Corporation Case No.: C06-3926 (HRL)

18 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
19 v. FOR DEFENDANT VEOH NETWORKS,
INC. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S
20 VEOH NETWORKS, Inc., a California MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE
Corporation,
21 Defendant.

22

23 Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2 and 7-2, Plaintiff IO Group, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) and

24 Defendant VEOH Networks, Inc. (“Defendant”), hereby stipulate that Defendant shall have an

25 extension of time, until Monday, September 25, 2006, to file its Response to Plaintiff’s Motion to

26 Consolidate. This extension will have no effect on any of the other dates currently scheduled in

27 this action.

28 -1-
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT
THELEN REID VEOH NETWORKS, INC. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE
& PRIEST LLP C-06-3926 (HRL)
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

Dockets.Justia.com
 Case 5:06-cv-03926-HRL Document 12 Filed 09/14/2006 Page 2 of 3

1 This brief extension of time was necessitated by the very recent retention of Thelen Reid &

2 Priest by defendant and the subsequent substitution of counsel. One previous extension has been

3 sought, stipulated to and ordered in this matter, extending defendant’s time to answer plaintiff’s

4 complaint until Monday, September 25, 2006.

5 SO STIPULATED.

6 Dated: September 12, 2006 THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP

7

8
/s/ Dean A. Morehous
9 Dean A. Morehous
10 Michael S. Elkin (pro hac vice pending)
11 Paul M. Fakler (pro hac vice pending)

12 Attorneys for Defendant

VEOH NETWORKS, INC.
13

14 Dated: September 12, 2006 THE LAW FIRM OF GILL SPERLEIN

Gill Sperlein
15

16
/s/ Gill Sperlein
17 GILL SPERLEIN
Attorneys for Plaintiff
18 IO GROUP, INC.

19 I, Dean A. Morehous, hereby attest, pursuant to N.D. Cal. General Order No. 45, that the

20 concurrence to the filing of this document has been obtained from each signatory hereto.

21 /s/ Dean A. Morehous

Dean A. Morehous
22

23

24

25

26

27

28 -2-
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT
THELEN REID VEOH NETWORKS, INC. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE
& PRIEST LLP C-06-3926 (HRL)
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
 Case 5:06-cv-03926-HRL Document 12 Filed 09/14/2006 Page 3 of 3

1 [PROPOSED] ORDER

3 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

4

5 September 14, 2006

Dated: ______________________
HONORABLE HOWARD R. LLOYD
6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 -3-
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT
THELEN REID VEOH NETWORKS, INC. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE
& PRIEST LLP C-06-3926 (HRL)
ATTORNEYS AT LAW