Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-02774/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-02774-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:501 Copyright Infringement

---

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 ___________________________________________

Stip. & Order Extending Time To Respond

to Counterclaims – Case No. 07-CV-2774 JF (RS) 1

Robert A. Spanner, Esq. (State Bar No. 60308)

TRIAL & TECHNOLOGY LAW GROUP

A Professional Corporation

545 Middlefield Road, Suite 220

Menlo Park, CA 94025

Telephone: (650) 324-2223

Facsimile: (650) 324-0178

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IP SOLUTIONS, INC.

David J. Miclean (State Bar No. 115098 

Christina D. Jordan (State Bar No. 245944)

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

500 Arguello St., Suite 500 

Redwood City, CA 94063 

Telephone: (650) 839-5070

Facsimile: (650) 839-5071 

Attorneys for Defendants BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.

and BANK OF AMERICA TECHNOLOGY 

AND OPERATIONS, INC. 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

IP SOLUTIONS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

vs.

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., et al.,

Defendants. ____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 07-CV-2774 JF (RS)

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER EXTENDING TIME IN

WHICH PLAINTIFF MAY

RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS’

COUNTERCLAIMS

TO THE COURT, TO ALL PARTIES, AND TO THE PARTIES’ ATTORNEYS

OF RECORD: 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiff IP

SOLUTIONS, INC. (“IPS”) and Defendants BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. and BANK OF

**E-filed 8/27/07** ---------------

Case 5:07-cv-02774-JF Document 18 Filed 08/27/07 Page 1 of 3
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 ___________________________________________

Stip. & Order Extending Time To Respond

to Counterclaims – Case No. 07-CV-2774 JF (RS) 2

AMERICA TECHNOLOGY AND OPERATIONS, INC. (together, “BANK OF

AMERICA”) that IPS be granted an additional sixteen (16) days in which to respond to

BANK OF AMERICA’S Counterclaims in the above-captioned matter.

Based on this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order, the date by which IPS must

respond to BANK OF AMERICA’S Counterclaims shall be extended to Tuesday,

September 4, 2007.

This Stipulation is not entered into for purposes of delay, and will not alter the date

of any event or any deadline already fixed by Court order. By entering into this stipulation,

neither Plaintiffs nor Defendants waive any rights, claims or defenses they may have in this

action. The Stipulation may be executed in counterparts and by facsimile signature, each of

which, when executed, shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one

and the same stipulation. This Stipulation contains the entire agreement among the parties. 

The undersigned hereby consent to the terms set forth in the foregoing Stipulation. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED.

Dated: ___________________ TRIAL & TECHNOLOGY LAW GROUP

A Professional Corporation

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IP SOLUTIONS, INC.

By: _____________________________________

Robert A. Spanner

8/17/2007 /s/ Robert A. Spanner

Case 5:07-cv-02774-JF Document 18 Filed 08/27/07 Page 2 of 3
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 ___________________________________________

Stip. & Order Extending Time To Respond

to Counterclaims – Case No. 07-CV-2774 JF (RS) 3

Dated: ___________________ FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

Attorneys for Defendants BANK OF AMERICA,

N.A. and BANK OF AMERICA TECHNOLOGY 

AND OPERATIONS, INC. 

By: _____________________________________

David J. Miclean

DECLARATION OF CONSENT

Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B) regarding signatures, I attest under

penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from

Christina D. Jordan. 

Dated: ___________________ TRIAL & TECHNOLOGY LAW GROUP

A Professional Corporation

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IP SOLUTIONS, INC.

By: _____________________________________

Robert A. Spanner

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: ______________,2007 _______________________________________ 

JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT

COURT

8/27/07 , JEREMY FOGEL 8/17/2007 /s/ 8/17/2007 /s/ Robert A. Spanner

Case 5:07-cv-02774-JF Document 18 Filed 08/27/07 Page 3 of 3