`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SANTA ANA DIVISION
`
`Case No. 8:19-cv-01151-JLS-DFM
`
`ORDER CONTINUING
`SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
`
`
`
`UNILOC 2017 LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`NETSUITE, INC.,
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 8:19-cv-01151-JLS-DFM Document 34 Filed 10/29/19 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:331
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`This matter is before the Court on the parties’ stipulation to continue the
`
`Scheduling Conference until November 8, 2019. The parties seek a one-week
`continuance to consolidate the Scheduling Conference in this matter with the
`Scheduling Conference date in a related case (against a different Defendant). Upon
`review, the Court notes that two motions are pending in this case, the resolution of
`which are likely to impact scheduling.1 Therefore, the Court CONTINUES the
`Scheduling Conference in this case to January 31, 20202 at 10:30 a.m.
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`DATED: October 29, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`________________________________
`Hon. Josephine L. Staton
`United States District Judge
`
`
`
`
`1 Defendant moves to dismiss the First Amended Complaint based in part upon a claim construction
`ruling on the asserted patents issued by the Eastern District of Texas. (Doc. 27.) Defendant also
`moves to stay non-claim construction discovery in this case. (Doc. 30.)
`2 As a matter of practice, the Court usually issues a scheduling order based on the written submission
`of the parties. The parties are directed to file an amended a Joint Rule 26(f) Report two weeks in
`advance of the continued Scheduling Conference. The parties are advised that absent extraordinary
`circumstances, the Court sets a full pretrial schedule; thus, in most instances, proposals like those
`made by the parties’ here (see Doc. 29-1) would be rejected, and the Court would calculate its
`presumptive schedule based on the Scheduling Conference date. Here, the Court continues the
`Scheduling Conference because the pending motions require the Court to give further consideration to
`the parties’ positions regarding the litigation in the Eastern District of Texas and how that litigation
`impacts this case.
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
