Innovus Prime, LLC v. Panasonic Corporation et al
Filing
35
ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING AND HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S RULE 56(D) MOTION by Judge Ronald M. Whyte (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/24/2012)
1
2
3
4
E-FILED on 8/24/12
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
8
SAN JOSE DIVISION
11
12
INNOVUS PRIME LLC.,
13
14
15
16
No. 12-CV-00660 RMW
Plaintiff,
v.
PANASONIC CORPORATION,
PANASONIC CORPORATION OF
AMERICA.,
17
ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR
EXPEDITED BRIEFING AND HEARING ON
PLAINTIFF’S RULE 56(D) MOTION
[Re Docket No. 31]
Defendants.
18
19
For good cause shown, it is hereby ordered that:
20
21
1) Defendants have until August 29, 2012 at 5 P.M. to respond to plaintiff’s Rule 56(d)
22
motion.
23
24
2) Plaintiff’s Rule 56(d) motion will be heard on August 31, 2012 prior to or during the
25
scheduled Case Management Conference.
26
27
3) Plaintiff’s deadline to respond to defendants’ motion for summary judgment is extended
28
until September 5, 2012, unless plaintiff’s Rule 56(d) motion is granted or the briefing
ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING AND HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S RULE 56(D) MOTION
12-00660 RMW
—No.
1
schedule is otherwise modified by court order or stipulation.
2
3
DATED:______8/24/12___
_________________________________
4
RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge
5
6
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING AND HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S RULE 56(D) MOTION
12-00660 RMW
2
—No.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?