Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-05679/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-05679-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright Infringement

---

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON

CV-05679-JF

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 

DURIE TANGRI LLP

Ragesh K Tangri (S.B. #159477)

 rtangri@durietangri.com

Michael H. Page (S.B. #154913)

 mpage@durietangri.com

Joseph C. Gratz (S.B. #240676)

 jgratz@durietangri.com

217 Leidesdorff Street

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Tel: (415) 362-6666 / Fax: (415) 236-6300 

Attorneys for Defendant PALM, INC.

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

DARIN W. SNYDER (S.B. #136003)

 dsnyder@omm.com

LUANN L. SIMMONS (S.B. #203526)

 lsimmons@omm.com

Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor

San Francisco, CA 9411-3823 

Tel: (415) 984-8700 / Fax: (415) 984-8701 

Attorneys for Plaintiff ARTIFEX SOFTWARE INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

ARTIFEX SOFTWARE INC., a California 

corporation, 

 Plaintiff,

v. 

PALM, INC., a Delaware corporation, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. CV-05679-JF

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO 

ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO 

COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

THEREON

------------ 09-5679-JF

------------------

Case 5:09-cv-05679-JF Document 9 Filed 01/08/10 Page 1 of 3
1

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON

CV-05679-JF

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

WHEREAS, Defendant’s response to Plaintiff’s complaint is currently due December 23, 

2009;

WHEREAS, Defendant recently retained counsel and therefore requires additional time to 

answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s complaint;

WHEREAS, counsel conferred and agreed that Defendant may extend the time within 

which to file its response to Plaintiff’s complaint;

WHEREAS, there have been no previously-requested time modifications in this case;

WHEREAS, a 30-day extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s 

complaint will not alter the date of any event or any deadline already fixed by Court order;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties hereto, through their 

respective counsel, as follows:

The time for Defendant Palm, Inc. to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s complaint 

shall be extended 30 days, up to and including January 22, 2010. 

SO STIPULATED this 23rd day of December, 2009: 

DURIE TANGRI LLP

By: /s/Ragesh K. Tangri

 Joseph C. Gratz

 Michael H. Page

 Ragesh K. Tangri

Attorneys for Palm, Inc.

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

By: /s/ Darin W. Snyder 

 Darin W. Snyder

 Luann L. Simmons

Attorneys for Artifex Software Inc.

Case 5:09-cv-05679-JF Document 9 Filed 01/08/10 Page 2 of 3
2

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON

CV-05679-JF

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 

ATTESTATION

Pursuant to General Order No. 45 Section X (B) regarding signature I, Ragesh K. Tangri, 

attest that concurrence in the filing of this documents has been obtained. 

By: /s/Ragesh K. Tangri

Ragesh K. Tangri

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: By: 

 HONORABLE JEREMY FOGEL

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1/4/10

Case 5:09-cv-05679-JF Document 9 Filed 01/08/10 Page 3 of 3