UAB "Planner5D" v. Facebook, Inc. et al, No. 3:2019cv03132 - Document 82 (N.D. Cal. 2020)

Court Description: ORDER granting 81 Stipulation to Reset Deadline as to 68 MOTION to Dismiss. Reply due by 6/17/2020. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 06/05/2020. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/5/2020)

Download PDF
UAB "Planner5D" v. Facebook, Inc. et al 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Doc. 82 JENNER & BLOCK LLP David R. Singer (Cal. Bar No. 204699) dsinger@jenner.com 633 West 5th Street, Suite 3600 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: (213) 239-5100 Facsimile: (213) 239-5199 THE BUSINESS LITIGATION GROUP PC Marc N. Bernstein (Cal. Bar No. 145837) mbernstein@blgrp.com Will B. Fitton (Cal. Bar No. 182818) wfitton@blgrp.com 150 Spear Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94105 Phone: (415) 765-6634 Facsimile: (415) 283-4804 JENNER & BLOCK LLP Andrew H. Bart (pro hac vice) abart@jenner.com Jacob L. Tracer (pro hac vice) jtracer@jenner.com 919 Third Avenue, 39th Floor New York, NY 10022 Phone: (212) 891-1600 Facsimile: (212) 891-1699 Attorneys for Plaintiff UAB “ Planner5D” d/b/a Planner 5D Attorneys for Defendant The Trustees of Princeton University 11 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 15 Plaintiff, 16 17 18 19 Case No. 3:19-cv-03132-WHO UAB “PLANNER5D” d/b/a PLANNER 5D, v. FACEBOOK INC.; FACEBOOK TECHNOLOGIES, LLC; THE TRUSTEES OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY; et al., 20 STIPULATION AND ORDER RESETTING TIME FOR THE TRUSTEES OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY TO FILE REPLY SUBMISSION IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINTS This Document Relates To: All Actions Complaint filed: June 5, 2019 First Amended Complaint filed: December 6, 2019 Defendants. 21 22 25 26 27 Complaint filed: March 31, 2020 Plaintiff, 23 24 Case No. 3:20-cv-02198-WHO UAB “PLANNER5D” d/b/a PLANNER 5D, v. FACEBOOK INC.; FACEBOOK TECHNOLOGIES, LLC; THE TRUSTEES OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY; et al., Defendants. 28 STIPULATION Dockets.Justia.com 1 JOINT STIPULATION 2 3 4 Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2 and 7-12, it is hereby stipulated by and among Plaintiff UAB “Planner5D” d/b/a Planner 5D (“Planner 5D”) and Defendant The Trustees of Princeton University (“Princeton”), through their respective attorneys, that: 5 6 7 WHEREAS, Planner 5D instituted this action on June 5, 2019, alleging claims of copyright infringement (the “Copyright Claims”) and misappropriation of trade secrets (the “Trade Secrets Claims”) (Dkt. 1)1; 8 9 10 WHEREAS, after the Court dismissed Planner 5D’s initial pleading, Planner 5D filed a First Amended Complaint on December 6, 2019, amending its pleading with regard to its Trade Secrets Claims (Dkt. 53); 11 12 13 WHEREAS, pursuant to a stipulation, the Court issued an Order on December 18, 2019, adjourning Princeton’s deadline to respond to the First Amended Complaint pending resolution of a procedural dispute regarding how this action should proceed (Dkt. 56); 14 15 WHEREAS, the Court resolved the aforementioned procedural dispute in an Order (the “Procedural Order”) issued on March 5, 2020 (Dkt. 59); 16 17 18 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Procedural Order, Planner 5D instituted a new action on March 31, 2020 (bearing the docket number 3:20-cv-02198) that reasserted its Copyright Claims (the “Copyright Complaint”) (3:20-cv-02198 Dkt. 1); 19 20 21 22 23 WHEREAS, pursuant to a stipulation, the Court issued an Order on April 6, 2020, adjourning Princeton’s deadline to respond to the First Amended Complaint and the Copyright Complaint until 21 days after the Court consolidated the two actions filed by Planner 5D; providing Planner 5D with 28 days to oppose any motion to dismiss filed by Princeton; and providing Princeton with 14 days to file a reply in support of any motion to dismiss (Dkt. 62); 24 25 WHEREAS, the Court issued an Order (the “Consolidation Order”) on April 8, 2020, consolidating the two actions filed by Planner 5D (Dkt. 64); 26 27 28 1 Unless otherwise noted, all docket entries refer to the docket for the first action filed by Planner 5D, No. 3:19-cv-03132. 1 STIPULATION Case Nos. 3:19-cv-03132-WHO & 3:20-cv-02198-WHO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 WHEREAS, Princeton moved to dismiss the First Amended Complaint and the Copyright Complaint on April 29, 2020 (i.e., 21 days after the Consolidation Order) (Dkt. 68); WHEREAS, Planner 5D opposed Princeton’s motion on May 27, 2020 (i.e., 28 days after Princeton filed its motion) (Dkt. 76); WHEREAS, Princeton’s reply submission in support of its motion is due on June 10, 2020 (i.e., 14 days after Planner 5D filed its opposition); WHEREAS, Princeton noticed its motion for a hearing on July 9, 2020 (Dkt. 68); WHEREAS, counsel for Princeton face logistical challenges in preparing Princeton’s reply submission related to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic and the civic disruption currently affecting municipalities across the country; WHEREAS, counsel for Princeton and Planner 5D have met and conferred, and agree that as a professional courtesy, and subject to the approval of this Court, counsel for Princeton may take an additional seven (7) days (i.e., until June 17, 2020) to file Princeton’s reply submission; and WHEREAS, the foregoing amendment to the briefing schedule will not affect any other scheduling deadline set by the Court in this action. NOW, THEREFORE IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED THAT, subject to the approval of the Court, Princeton’s time to file its reply submission in support of its motion to dismiss shall be reset to June 17, 2020. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 STIPULATION Case Nos. 3:19-cv-03132-WHO & 3:20-cv-02198-WHO 1 Dated: June 4, 2020 JENNER & BLOCK LLP 2 By: /s/ Andrew H. Bart ANDREW H. BART (PRO HAC VICE) 3 4 Attorneys for Defendant The Trustees of Princeton University 5 6 Dated: June 4, 2020 THE BUSINESS LITIGATION GROUP PC 7 8 By: /s/ Marc N. Bernstein MARC N. BERNSTEIN (CAL. BAR NO. 145837) 9 10 Attorneys for Plaintiff UAB “Planner5D” d/b/a Planner 5D 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 STIPULATION Case Nos. 3:19-cv-03132-WHO & 3:20-cv-02198-WHO 1 2 3 4 ORDER PURUSANT TO STIPULATION AND FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The time by which Defendant The Trustees of Princeton University must file its reply submission in support of its motion to dismiss (Dkt. 68) shall be reset to June 17, 2020. 5 6 7 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. June 5 Dated: ______________, 2020 ____________________________________ The Honorable William H. Orrick United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER Case Nos. 3:19-cv-03132-WHO & 3:20-cv-02198-WHO 1 2 3 4 5 ATTESTATION I, Andrew H. Bart, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Resetting the Time for The Trustees of Princeton University to File Its Reply Submission in Support of Its Motion to Dismiss the Complaints. In compliance with Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from all signatories. 6 7 8 Dated: June 4, 2020 By: /s/ Andrew H. Bart_________________ Andrew H. Bart (pro hac vice) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ATTESTATION Case Nos. 3:19-cv-03132-WHO & 3:20-cv-02198-WHO

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.