Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03887/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03887-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 422
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Appeals Rule 28 USC 158
Cause of Action: 28:0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BAP)

---

1

___________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER CHANGING TIME OF MOTION AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Paravue Corporation v. Heller Ehrman, LLP – No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

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

James V. Weixel (166024)

WEIXEL LAW OFFICE

150 Post Street, Suite 520

San Francisco, California 94108

Telephone: (415) 691-7495

Facsimile: (866) 640-3918

Email: appeals@jimweixel.com

Attorney for Appellant

PARAVUE CORPORATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

PARAVUE CORPORATION,

Appellant,

v.

HELLER EHRMAN, LLP,

Appellee.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

Hon. Charles R. Breyer

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER 

CHANGING TIME OF MOTION AND 

BRIEFING SCHEDULE

ORDER

Pursuant to Local Rule 7-12, Appellant PARAVUE CORPORATION and Appellee HELLER 

EHRMAN, LLP, by and through their respective undersigned counsel, stipulate and agree to a 

continuance of Paravue’s motion for limited remand to bankruptcy court (filed December 19, 2014), and 

an extension of the briefing deadlines in this appeal, in the respects stated herein.

In support of this stipulation, the undersigned counsel for Appellant, James V. Weixel, states and 

declares as follows:

1. I am an attorney at law licensed to practice before all courts of the State of California, and 

am a member of the bar of this Court. I am counsel of record in this proceeding for Appellant Paravue 

Case 3:14-cv-03887-CRB Document 22 Filed 01/07/15 Page 1 of 5
2

___________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER CHANGING TIME OF MOTION AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Paravue Corporation v. Heller Ehrman, LLP – No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

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

Corporation. I have personal knowledge of the matters stated in this Declaration and, if called to testify 

thereto, could and would do so truthfully and competently.

2. I make this Declaration pursuant to Local Rule 6-2 in support of the parties’ stipulation 

for an extension of the briefing schedule in this matter.

3. By previous agreement of the parties and the order of the Court, Paravue’s opening brief 

to this Court is due by February 2, 2015, Heller Ehrman’s answering brief is due by March 23, 2015, and 

Paravue’s reply brief is due by April 6, 2015.

4. On December 19, 2015, Paravue filed a motion for a limited remand of this matter to the 

bankruptcy court for the purpose of allowing that court to consider and determine Paravue’s motion for 

reconsideration of the summary judgments granted in Heller Ehrman’s favor on the claims which are the 

subject of this appeal. The motion is set for hearing before this Court on January 23, 2014. Heller’s 

response to the motion is due January 2, 2015, and Paravue’s reply is due January 9, 2015.

5. The day Paravue’s motion was filed, I was contacted by Marjorie Manning, Esq., Heller 

Ehrman’s counsel. Ms. Manning explained that she would be out of the office until the week of January 

12, 2015 and thus requested that I agree to continue the motion for two weeks. As I am currently out of 

the Bay Area myself for the holidays, I agreed to that request. However, I pointed out that moving the 

hearing out two weeks would mean the motion would be heard after Paravue’s opening brief was due to 

be filed on February 2nd. I thus suggested that the briefing schedule be moved out as well. We agreed it 

would be appropriate to continue the briefing scheduled by two weeks as to all dates. 

6. As stated in the stipulation below, the parties have stipulated and agreed to the following 

continued motion schedule as appropriate and reasonable:

Heller Ehrman’s response due: January 16, 2015

Paravue’s reply due: January 23, 2015

Hearing: February 6, 2015, 10:00 a.m.

The parties have also stipulated and agreed to the following revised briefing schedule as 

appropriate and reasonable:

Appellant’s opening brief due: February 16, 2015

Appellee’s brief due: April 6, 2015

Case 3:14-cv-03887-CRB Document 22 Filed 01/07/15 Page 2 of 5
3

___________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER CHANGING TIME OF MOTION AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Paravue Corporation v. Heller Ehrman, LLP – No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

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

Appellant’s reply brief due: April 20, 2015

7. There have been two stipulations for an extended briefing schedule, which stipulations

have resulted in the current briefing schedule reflected in the Court’s order filed December 15, 2014 

(Doc. 18). There have been no stipulations or other continuances as to the motion.

8. The requested extensions would cause the motion and briefing schedules in this matter to 

be extended by two weeks with respect to all deadlines and hearings, as set forth above.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United 

States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 24th day of December, 2014, at 

Honolulu, Hawaii.

____________/s/ James V. Weixel___________________ James V. Weixel

STIPULATION

Appellant Paravue Corporation and Appellee Heller Ehrman, LLP, by and through their 

respective undersigned counsel, stipulate and agree, and thereupon request that the Court enter an order 

accordingly, to change time to reflect an extension of the following deadlines as follows.

As to Paravue’s motion for limited remand to bankruptcy court, currently set for hearing at 10:00 

a.m. on January 23, 2015:

Heller Ehrman’s response due: January 16, 2015

Paravue’s reply due: January 23, 2015

Hearing: February 20, 2015, 10:00 a.m.

As to the briefing schedule in the appeal before this Court:

Appellant’s opening brief due: February 16, 2015

Appellee’s brief due: April 6, 2015

Appellant’s reply brief due: April 20, 2015

This stipulation is made upon the declaration of James V. Weixel, Esq., counsel for Paravue 

Corporation in this proceeding, as stated supra.

Case 3:14-cv-03887-CRB Document 22 Filed 01/07/15 Page 3 of 5
4

___________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER CHANGING TIME OF MOTION AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Paravue Corporation v. Heller Ehrman, LLP – No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

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

The parties stipulate and agree to this briefing schedule and request that the Court enter an order 

accordingly, pursuant to Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12.

Dated: December 24, 2014. WEIXEL LAW OFFICE

By: /s/ James V. Weixel___________________ James V. Weixel

Attorney for Appellant

PARAVUE CORPORATION

Dated: December 24, 2014. BOLLING & GAWTHROP

By: /s/ Marjorie E. Manning___________________ Marjorie E. Manning (by consent)

Attorney for the Post-Confirmation Liquidating Debtor,

Appellee HELLER EHRMAN, LLP

ATTESTATION RE ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE(S)

I, James V. Weixel, counsel for Appellant Paravue Corporation, hereby attest pursuant to Local 

Rule 5-1(i)(3) that the electronic signature(s) of other counsel and/or parties appearing above indicate(s)

that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of said counsel and/or 

parties, and that such electronic signature(s) serve(s) in lieu of said signature(s) on the document.

Dated: December 24, 2014. WEIXEL LAW OFFICE

By: /s/ James V. Weixel___________________ James V. Weixel

Attorney for Appellant

PARAVUE CORPORATION

Case 3:14-cv-03887-CRB Document 22 Filed 01/07/15 Page 4 of 5
5

___________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER CHANGING TIME OF MOTION AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Paravue Corporation v. Heller Ehrman, LLP – No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

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

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

________________________________________ CHARLES R. BREYER Senior United States District Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

AS MODIFIED

Judge Charles R. Breyer

Case 3:14-cv-03887-CRB Document 22 Filed 01/07/15 Page 5 of 5