Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-00869/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-00869-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 15:1 Antitrust Litigation

---

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

TO ENLARGE TIME AND TO CONTINUE HEARING

CASE NO. C-08-00869 JW (HRL)

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 

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

Daniel M. Wall (Bar No. 102580) 

Timothy L. O’Mara (Bar No. 212731) 

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 

San Francisco, California 94111-6538 

Telephone: (415) 391-0600 

Facsimile: (415) 395-8095 

Email: Dan.Wall@lw.com

Email: Tim.Omara@lw.com

Attorneys for Defendants 

ATMI, INC. and ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

MATERIALS, INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

PRAXAIR, INC., 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

ATMI, INC. and ADVANCED 

TECHNOLOGY MATERIALS, INC., 

 Defendants. 

CASE NO. C 08-00869 JW (HRL) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

ENLARGING TIME TO ANSWER OR 

OTHERWISE RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S 

COMPLAINT; CONTINUING HEARING 

ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION 

[CIVIL LOCAL RULES 6-1, 6-2 and 7-12] 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge James Ware

Case 5:08-cv-00869-JW Document 21 Filed 03/10/08 Page 1 of 4
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO 1

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

TO ENLARGE TIME AND TO CONTINUE HEARING

CASE NO. C-08-00869 JW (HRL)

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 

WHEREAS, the Complaint in this case was filed on February 8, 2008; 

WHEREAS, the Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction is set for hearing on 

March 24, 2008; 

WHEREAS, Defendants’ answer to the Complaint and opposition to Plaintiff’s 

Motion for Preliminary Injunction are due on Monday, March 3, 2008; 

WHEREAS, Defendants have requested additional time to respond to Plaintiff’s 

complaint and the parties agree to extend Defendants’ filing deadlines by two weeks to Monday, 

March 17, 2008; 

WHEREAS, no previous time modifications – whether by stipulation or Court 

order – have been entered in this case; 

WHEREAS, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(a), counsel for Defendants is 

concurrently filing a declaration in support of this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order; 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the 

undersigned counsel for the parties as follows: 

1. The time for Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint 

is enlarged by fourteen days, from March 3, 2008 to March 17, 2008; 

2. The time for Defendants to oppose Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary 

Injunction is enlarged by fourteen days, from March 3, 2008 to March 17, 2008; and 

 3. The hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction will be 

continued from March 24, 2008 to April 21, 2008 at 9:00 a.m., which is the next available civil 

motion hearing date on the Court’s calendar; provided, however, that in the event Plaintiff seeks, 

by means of a special setting, an alternative date to have its Motion for Preliminary Injunction 

heard, Defendants agree that they will not object to such request. 

 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

///

Case 5:08-cv-00869-JW Document 21 Filed 03/10/08 Page 2 of 4
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO 2

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

TO ENLARGE TIME AND TO CONTINUE HEARING

CASE NO. C-08-00869 JW (HRL)

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 

Dated: February 29, 2008 Respectfully Submitted, 

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

 Daniel M. Wall 

 Timothy L. O’Mara 

 

By /s/ Timothy L. O’Mara 

Timothy L. O’Mara 

Attorneys for Defendants 

ATMI, INC. and ADVANCED 

TECHNOLOGY MATERIALS, INC. 

Dated: February 29, 2008 Respectfully Submitted, 

 HELLER EHRMAN LLP

 Stephen V. Bomse 

 

By /s/ Stephen V. Bomse 

Stephen V. Bomse 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

PRAXAIR, INC. 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: _____________________ By:_______________________________________ 

THE HONORABLE JAMES WARE 

United States District Judge 

The hearing on Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction is continued to 

April 21, 2008 at 9 A.M. March 10, 2008

Case 5:08-cv-00869-JW Document 21 Filed 03/10/08 Page 3 of 4
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO 3

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

TO ENLARGE TIME AND TO CONTINUE HEARING

CASE NO. C-08-00869 JW (HRL)

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 

ELECTRONIC CASE FILING ATTESTATION

(General Order No. 45(X)(B)) 

 I, Timothy L. O’Mara, am the ECF User whose identification and password are 

being used to file this STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ENLARGING TIME TO 

ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT; CONTINUING 

HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION pursuant to 

Civil Local Rules 6-1 and 6-2. In compliance with General Order No. 45 (X)(B), I hereby attest 

that the concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from Stephen V. Bomse. 

Dated: February 29, 2008 Respectfully submitted, 

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

 Daniel M. Wall 

 Timothy L. O’Mara 

By /s/ Timothy L.O’Mara 

 Timothy L. O’Mara 

Attorneys for Defendants 

ATMI, INC. and ADVANCED 

TECHNOLOGY MATERIALS, INC. 

 SF\646296 

Case 5:08-cv-00869-JW Document 21 Filed 03/10/08 Page 4 of 4