Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03050/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03050-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright Infringement

---

C-06-03050 VRW - 1 -

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

G 

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 

MANI SUBRAMANIAN [Pro Se] 

c/o Robert Oca 

P.O. Box 12231, San Francisco, CA 94112 

(206) 984-4644 

(206) 984-4644 [fax] 

Plaintiff Pro Se

WILLIAM D. CONNELL, Cal. State Bar No. 89124 

SALLIE KIM, Cal. State Bar No. 142781 

KIMBERLY A. DONOVAN, State Bar No. 160729 

GCA LAW PARTNERS LLP 

1891 Landings Drive, Mountain View, CA 94043 

(650) 428-3900 

(650) 428-3901 [fax] 

Attorneys for Defendants QAD Inc. and 

William D. Connell 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

MANI SUBRAMANIAN, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

QAD INC., et al. 

 Defendants. 

Case No. C-06-03050-VRW [ECF] 

Civil L-R 7-12 and 16-2(d) 

ADR L-R 2-3 and 7-2 

STIPULATION AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

1. FOR A SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE TO TAKE PLACE 

BEFORE A MAGISTRATE JUDGE; 

2. FOR A STAY OF PROCEEDINGS 

PENDING THE CONDUCT AND 

RESOLUTION OF THE 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE; and 

3. FOR VACATION/CONTINUANCE 

OF THE APRIL 24, 2007 CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

PENDING FURTHER ORDER 

Court room: 6 [17th floor] 

Judge: Hon. Vaughn R. Walker 

 

Case 3:06-cv-03050-VRW Document 88 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 1 of 4
 Case 3:06-cv-03050-VRW Document 89 Filed 04/13/07 Page 1 of 4
 C-06-03050 VRW - 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

G 

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 

STIPULATION 

The parties to the above-captioned action jointly submit this Stipulation and Proposed 

Order and request the Court to grant the relief sought herein. 

1. ACTION REQUESTED 

For all the good reasons set out below, the parties request the Court to: 

(a) order this matter to immediately proceed to a settlement conference before a magistrate 

judge at the earliest time that can be accommodated by the ADR section and to the extent 

possible subject to the convenience of the parties; and 

(b) order a stay of the proceedings pending the outcome of the ADR settlement conference to 

take place pursuant to the order sought in (a) above; and 

(c) to vacate/continue the Initial Case Management Conference currently scheduled for April 

24, 2007 and all deadlines and tasks associated therewith pending further order of the Court. 

2. REASONS SUPPORTING THE REQUEST 

Background 

On February 28, 2007, the Court approved a stipulation continuing the Initial Case 

Management Conference to April 24, 2007, Doc #77, which provided time for QAD to file its 

answer, and for the parties to meet and confer under FRCP rule 26(f) by March 16, 2007. QAD 

filed its answer on March 5, 2007, Doc #80. The parties have engaged in meet and confer efforts 

with respect to the matters discussed in FRCP Rules 16 and 26 by telephone and via e-mail. 

ADR telephone conference held 

On March 1, 2007, the parties conferred with the ADR staff regarding their preferences 

for an ADR process, see unnumbered Docket entry between entry #77 and #78. The parties now 

agree that a settlement conference before a magistrate judge to take place as soon as possible 

would be appropriate. Plaintiff is also amenable to mediation before a senior member of the 

court’s permanent staff, such as the ADR program director, but Defendant is not amenable to the 

same. The ADR program that all of the parties concur on is a settlement conference before a 

Case 3:06-cv-03050-VRW Document 88 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 2 of 4
 Case 3:06-cv-03050-VRW Document 89 Filed 04/13/07 Page 2 of 4
 C-06-03050 VRW - 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

G 

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 

magistrate judge (not assigned to this matter), and accordingly the parties stipulate to and request 

such a settlement conference. 

ADR Local Rules 2-3 and 7-2 permit the Court to order this matter to proceed to a 

settlement conference upon stipulation of the parties. 

A stay pending the outcome of the ADR process is appropriate

The new standing order regarding case management conferences, in paragraph.20 

encourages a “just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of the matter”. Given the complexity of 

the disputes between the parties, a stay for the purposes of allowing the proposed settlement 

conference to proceed first would promote these objectives. In addition, the settlement 

conference would enable the parties to focus their differing views on the various issues at large 

so that if the matter is not settled the parties would be in a better position to come up with a more 

realistic pre-trial plan. Accordingly, the parties also request the Court to order an immediate stay 

of these proceedings pending the outcome of the settlement conference. 

Vacating the CMC scheduled for April 24, 2007

To effect the foregoing, the parties request the Court to vacate and/or continue the Case 

Management Conference currently scheduled for April 24, 2007, and all deadlines associated with 

the same, pending the completion of the settlement conference and further Order of the Court 

Dated: April 12, 2007 WILLIAM D. CONNELL 

 SALLIE KIM, Cal. State Bar No. 142781 

 KIMBERLY A. DONOVAN, State Bar No. 160729 

 GCA LAW PARTNERS LLP 

 By: /s/ William D. Connell 

 Attorneys for Defendants QAD Inc. and 

 William D. Connell 

Dated: April 12, 2007 MANI SUBRAMANIAN [PRO SE] 

 /s/ Mani Subramanian________ 

Next Page: Proposed Order

Case 3:06-cv-03050-VRW Document 88 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 3 of 4
 Case 3:06-cv-03050-VRW Document 89 Filed 04/13/07 Page 3 of 4
 C-06-03050 VRW - 1 -

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

 [Proposed] Order 

[Proposed] ORDER

 A Settlement Conference shall take place before a Magistrate Judge of this Court at 

the earliest time available through the ADR section, and to the extent possible, taking into 

account the convenience of the parties. 

 This matter is stayed for all purposes other than the conduct of the Settlement 

Conference ordered above, pending the outcome of such Settlement Conference. The parties 

shall file a joint report with the Court within 14 days of completion of the Settlement 

Conference. 

The Case Management Conference currently scheduled for April 24, 2007, shall be 

vacated and continued pending further order of the Court. 

 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: _________ ___, 2007 

 

_________________________________ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 3:06-cv-03050-VRW Document 88 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 4 of 4

April 13

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Vaughn R Walker

Case 3:06-cv-03050-VRW Document 89 Filed 04/13/07 Page 4 of 4