Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-00453/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-00453-48/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 380
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Property Damage
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARC OPPERMAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

PATH, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-00453-JST 

ORDER VACATING PRIOR CASE 

SCHEDULING ORDER AND CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Re: ECF No. 687

At the April 12, 2016 case management conference, the Court ordered the parties to file 

with the Court a list of the discovery needed by Plaintiffs to defend Apple’s anticipated early 

summary judgment motion and the dates by which Apple would provide that material. The Court 

also set a further case management conference for April 20, 2016 at 3:00 p.m. See ECF No. 687. 

The point of this procedure was to minimize the risk that the Court would need to entertain a 

motion for continuance or denial of the motion pursuant to Rule 56(d) of the Rules of Civil 

Procedure if the Court allowed Apple to file an early summary judgment motion with regard to 

Plaintiffs’ Path-related allegations. 

Upon further consideration, the Court concludes that its order was premature. The 

additional discovery, if any, that Plaintiffs need will be more clearly known after Apple files its 

motion; the dates by which that discovery can be provided will be more clearly known after 

Plaintiffs have asked for it. If Plaintiffs’ need for discovery supports a motion for continuance 

under Rule 56(d), Plaintiffs will file such a motion. It is not necessary, or even desirable, to 

attempt to resolve these issues now, in a vacuum. 

Accordingly, the Court now VACATES its prior order requiring the parties to provide a 

list of discovery and anticipated response dates and VACATES the April 20, 2016 case 

management conference. The Court GRANTS Apple’s request to file an early summary judgment 

Case 3:13-cv-00453-JST Document 688 Filed 04/13/16 Page 1 of 2
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

motion as to Plaintiffs’ Path-related claims and SETS the following schedule:

Apple’s Summary Judgment Brief: April 22, 2016

Plaintiffs’ Opposition: July 8, 2016

Apple’s Reply: August 5, 2016

Hearing: August 25, 2016 at 2:00 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 13, 2016

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:13-cv-00453-JST Document 688 Filed 04/13/16 Page 2 of 2