Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-05222/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-05222-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

NOT FOR CITATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

TCGIVEGA INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

KARNA GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;

KANNAN R. AYYAR, JNANA R. DASH AKA

JNAN DASH; and GREGORY D. HAWKINS,

Defendants. /

No. C05-05222 JF (HRL)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR AN ORDER

SHORTENING TIME

[Re: Docket No. 93]

On June 1, 2007, this court issued an order setting an expedited briefing and hearing

schedule on plaintiff’s motion to compel depositions and motion for sanctions. Under that

schedule, defendants’ opposition is due by June 6, 2007 and plaintiff’s reply is due by June 11,

2007. Those motions are set for hearing on June 19, 2007. (See Order Granting Plaintiff’s

Motion to Shorten Time, Docket No. 86).

On June 4, 2007, defendants filed a motion for protective order and requested that it also

be heard on June 19, 2007 along with plaintiff’s discovery motions. Plaintiff opposes

defendants’ motion for an order shortening time. Defendants’ motion for expedition is

procedurally defective in certain respects. Nevertheless, insofar as defendants’ underlying

discovery motion appears to raise issues as to the location of one of the depositions plaintiff is

moving to compel, the court finds that it will be more efficient to hear the parties’ respective

*E-FILED: 6/6/2007*

Case 5:05-cv-05222-JF Document 98 Filed 06/06/07 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

discovery motions at the same time. Accordingly, defendants’ motion for an order shortening

time is granted and briefing on the parties’ respective motions shall be filed as follows:

1. In their opposition to plaintiff’s motion to compel (due by June 6, 2007),

defendants shall not repeat any arguments or re-submit any exhibits that have already been filed

in connection with their motion for protective order.

2. Plaintiff shall respond to the issues raised in defendants’ motion for protective

order in its reply brief (due by June 11, 2007).

3. Defendants’ reply on their motion for protective order shall be filed no later

than noon on June 13, 2007.

4. The hearing on defendants’ motion for protective order is set for June 19, 2007,

10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2, to coincide with the hearing on plaintiff’s motion to compel

depositions and motion for sanctions.

Dated:

 

HOWARD R. LLOYD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

June 6, 2007

Case 5:05-cv-05222-JF Document 98 Filed 06/06/07 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

3

5:05-cv-5222 Notice will be electronically mailed to: 

Jaipat Singh Jain jjain@lpgk.com 

Antoinette McGill antoinette.mcgill@chugh.com, oscar.rivera@chugh.com; paul@chugh.com 

Melinda Mae Morton mmorton@be-law.com, gsimmons@be-law.com 

Michael W. Stebbins mstebbins@be-law.com, gsimmons@be-law.com; vross@be-law.com 

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have

not registered for e-filing under the court’s CM/ECF program.

Case 5:05-cv-05222-JF Document 98 Filed 06/06/07 Page 3 of 3