Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-00787/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-00787-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 423
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Withdrawal 28 USC 157
Cause of Action: 28:0157 Motion for Withdrawal of Reference

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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 1 The holding of this court is limited to the facts and the particular circumstances

underlying the present motion.

ORDER, page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

In re:

EXDS, Inc. (f/k/a EXODUS

COMMUNICATIONS, INC.), et al.,

Debtor

___________________________________

EXDS, Inc.,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEVCON CONSTRUCTION, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: C 05-0787 PVT

ORDER GRANTING IN PART EXDS’

ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST FOR

LEAVE TO FILE REPLY

On May 27, 2005, Plaintiff EXDS, Inc., (“EXDS”) filed an administrative request for leave to

file a reply to Defendant Devcon Construction, Inc.’s (“Devcon”) supplemental brief in support of its

motion for partial summary judgment.1 Devcon opposed the request. Based on the request and

opposition thereto, 

Case 5:05-cv-00787-PVT Document 164 Filed 06/02/05 Page 1 of 2
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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 Based on the record before the court, it is undisputed that Ms. Freed had some degree of

authority to act on EXDS’ behalf. The court’s inquiry was, if she acted beyond the scope of her

authority, were her actions nonetheless ratified by EXDS?

ORDER, page 2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that EXDS’ request is GRANTED IN PART. No later than June

6, 2005, EXDS may file a supplemental reply to Devcon’s supplemental brief with regard to the

issue of ratification only. Because the court did not authorize Devcon to submit further briefing on

the issue of actual authority, the court will not consider that portion of Devcon’s supplemental brief.2

EXDS’ supplemental reply shall be no longer than 5 pages.

Dated: 6/2/05

 /s/ Patricia V. Trumbull 

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:05-cv-00787-PVT Document 164 Filed 06/02/05 Page 2 of 2