Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-05122/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-05122-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

---

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

1

*E-FILED 11/30/06*

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

BERCUT-VANDERVOORT & CO., 

Plaintiff,

 v.

MAISON TARRIDE LEDROIT & CIE,

Defendant. /

NO. C 05-5122 JF (RS)

ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO

SEEK RECONSIDERATION

Before the Court is defendant’s application under Civil Local Rule 7-9 for leave to seek

reconsideration of the Court’s order entered November 15, 2006. The application is denied. 

Although defendant has shown a change of circumstances in that the deposition now involves only a

single designee, the Court noted at the at the prior hearing that it believed the same result would be

warranted even if defendant designated only Mr. de Boisredon. While the equities supporting the

protective order would be stronger as additional designees were added, plaintiff adequately

established that there is no reason to depart from the ordinary rule as to the place of corporate

depositions, and that it would be unduly burdened by doing so even with Mr. de Boisredon as the

sole designee. 

The parties are hereby directed, however, to engage in a further meet and confer effort to

explore the possibility that Mr. de Boisredon’s deposition could be taken in conjunction with any

business trip that may bring him to this country sufficiently in advance of the trial, even if after the

Case 5:05-cv-05122-JF Document 70 Filed 11/30/06 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 ORDER 

C 05-5122 JF (RS) 

2

discovery cut-off, in light of the mutual cost-savings that would likely result.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 30, 2006 

RICHARD SEEBORG

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:05-cv-05122-JF Document 70 Filed 11/30/06 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 ORDER 

C 05-5122 JF (RS) 

3

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT NOTICE OF THIS ORDER HAS BEEN GIVEN TO:

Lila Inayat Bailey lbailey@perkinscoie.com

Anne Elizabeth Kearns akearns@kksrr.com, alau@kksrr.com

Kenneth E. Keller kkeller@kksrr.com, alau@kksrr.com

Michael H. Rubin mrubin@perkinscoie.com, sandrews@perkinscoie.com

Kenneth B. Wilson kwilson@perkinscoie.com, eeberline@perkinscoie.com;

sshanberg@perkinscoie.com; wriggs@perkinscoie.com; lbailey@perkinscoie.com;

dhellmoldt@perkinscoie.com; mrubin@perkinscoie.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. 

Dated: 11/30/06 Chambers of Judge Richard Seeborg

By: /s/ BAK 

Case 5:05-cv-05122-JF Document 70 Filed 11/30/06 Page 3 of 3