Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-04080/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-04080-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1051 Trademark Infringement

---

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 GRANTING DEFENDANTDAVIDHSIEH'SEXPARTEAPPLICATIONFOREXTENSIONOF TIME—C-04-04080 RMW

JAH

E-FILED on 9/30/05

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

SONISTA, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

DAVID HSIEH, TECHPAC, INC., PIXA, INC.,

Defendants.

No. C-04-04080 RMW

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT DAVID

HSIEH'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR

EXTENSION OF TIME

[Re Docket Nos. 93, 95, 98]

Plaintiff Sonista Corp. ("Sonista") filed a complaint against David Hsieh ("Hsieh"), Techpac, Inc.

("Techpac"), and Pixa, Inc.("Pixa") on September 27, 2004 alleging, among other things, infringement of its

DVONE mark. For approximately a year, all defendants have been represented by the same counsel, John

McIntyre of Popelka, Allard. On September 8, 2005, Mr. McIntyre notified this court that he was

withdrawing from representation of Hsieh. 

On September 21, 2005, Hsieh, through newly-retained counsel, filed an ex parte application

requesting that the schedule for the upcoming motions for summary judgment be pushed back at least two

months, that discoverybe extended for at least threemonths, and that the trialdate be pushed back at leastfour

months. The plaintiff opposed changing the date for the summary judgment hearing but joined Hsieh's request

to continue the trial date and extend discovery. Conversely, the corporate defendants opposed changing the

Case 5:04-cv-04080-RMW Document 112 Filed 09/30/05 Page 1 of 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

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTDAVIDHSIEH'SEXPARTEAPPLICATIONFOREXTENSIONOF TIME—C-04-04080 RMW

JAH 2

trial date and extending discovery, but consented to brief extension of time to respond to the pending motions

for summary judgment. 

While extremely reluctant to delay the upcoming trial at such a late day, the court will grant Hsieh's

request for additional time to prepare. It is hereby ordered that Hsieh may file his opposition to plaintiff's

motion for summary judgment onOctober 28, 2005, and any repliesshall be filed byNovember 4, 2005; that

the summary judgment motion hearing set for October 14, 2005, is continued untilNovember 18, 2005; that

discovery will close on October 14, 2005; that the pretrial conference will be held on December 15, 2005;

and that the trial date of November 7, 2005, is continued until January 9, 2006. 

DATED: 9/30/05 /s/ Ronald M. Whyte

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

Case 5:04-cv-04080-RMW Document 112 Filed 09/30/05 Page 2 of 2