Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02423/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02423-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud

---

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

2

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 

INJUNCTION

137224.007/709094v1

T

H

OIT

S LAW

A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION

400 M

AIN

S

T

REET, S

UITE 250

LO

S

ALT

O

S, C

ALIFO

R

NIA 94022

(650) 327-4200

to show cause as to why a preliminary injunction should not issue against defendants;

Whereas the Court set the deadline for defendants’ opposition to said motion to be due on 

June 15, 2015 and plaintiff’s reply to be due on June 22, 2015;

Whereas since June 5, 2015, plaintiff has made attempts but has been unsuccessful in 

locating Mr. Collins and effecting service on him;

Whereas on June 15, 2015, counsel for Mr. Collins, Vernon C. Goins, contacted 

MACOM’s counsel and stated he would now be representing Mr. Collins in this case;

Whereas Mr. Goins requested that the June 29, 2015 hearing be continued to a later date 

so as to allow time to file a response on behalf of Mr. Collins; 

Whereas Mr. Goins has accepted service of the complaint and the court’s June 5, 2015 

Order by e-mail on behalf of Mr. Collins;

Whereas Mr. Goins has agreed to produce Mr. Collins for deposition on June 19, 2015 

at 400 Main Street, Suite 250, Los Altos, California;

Whereas, plaintiff and defendants agree to continue the June 29, 2015 hearing to July 17, 

2015 or the first available date thereafter to be set by the Court;

Whereas, plaintiff and defendant agree that defendants’ opposition to said motion will be 

due two weeks (14 calendar days) prior to the new hearing date and plaintiff’s reply will be due 

one week (7 calendar days) prior to the new hearing date;

Whereas, plaintiff and defendants agree that the Court’s June 5, 2015 Order shall remain 

in effect up to and including the continued hearing date. 

IT IS SO STIPLATED.

Dated: June 18, 2015.

THOITS LAW

/s/ Andrew P. Holland

Andrew P. Holland

Attorneys for Plaintiff

M/A-COM Technology Solutions Inc.

Case 3:15-cv-02423-EMC Document 22 Filed 06/18/15 Page 2 of 3
July 17, 2015 at 2:00 pm. 

Opposition due June 26, 2015. Reply due July 2, 2015. June 18

UNITED STATES

D

I

STRICT COURT

NORTHERN

DIST

RI

CT

OF CALIFORNIA

IT

IS

SO

ORDERED

AS

MODIFIED

Judge

Edward

M. Chen