Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-05133/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-05133-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR DEFENDANT DATAPIPE, INC.’S RESPONSE TO 

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 

CV-09-5133 (JF)

ULRICO S. ROSALES, State Bar No. 139809 

MICHAEL J. NADER, State Bar No. 200425 

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI 

Professional Corporation 

650 Page Mill Road 

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 

Telephone: (650) 493-9300 

Facsimile: (650) 565-5100 

Email: urosales@wsgr.com 

Attorneys for Defendant 

DATAPIPE, INC. 

SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN & ARNOLD LLP 

STEVEN D. ROLAND State Bar No. 108097 

AMBER RYE BRUMFIEL State Bar No. 215191 

One Market Plaza 

Steuart Tower, 8th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94105 

Telephone: (415) 781-7900 

Facsimile: (415) 781-2635 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

QUALITY TECHNOLOGY SERVICES HOLDING, LLC 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

QUALITY TECHNOLOGY SERVICES 

HOLDING, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability 

Company, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CHRISTIAN KOCH, an individual, DAVID 

BUCIAK, an individual, DATAPIPE, INC., a 

California Corporation, TIM RHODES, an 

individual, 

Defendants 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO.: CV-09-5133 (JF) 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND THE 

TIME FOR DEFENDANT 

DATAPIPE, INC.’S RESPONSE TO 

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT TO 

MARCH 5, 2010 

Complaint Filed: October 29, 2009 

 Judge: Hon. Jeremy Fogel 

 

Case 5:09-cv-05133-JF Document 37 Filed 01/27/10 Page 1 of 3
 -1- 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR DEFENDANT DATAPIPE, INC.’S RESPONSE TO 

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 

CV-09-5133 (JF) 

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 Parties are engaged in a forensics discovery process that may result in a 

resolution of this matter, and thus the Parties want to permit sufficient time for the forensics 

discovery process to be completed prior to further litigation deadlines; 

WHEREAS, Defendant DataPipe, Inc. (“DataPipe”) and Plaintiff Quality Technology 

Services Holding, LLC (the “Plaintiff”) hereby stipulate and agree to extend the date of 

DataPipe’s response to Plaintiff’s Complaint until March 5, 2010; 

WHEREAS, Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 6-1(a), DataPipe and Plaintiff acknowledge 

and agree that the new response date will not alter the date of any event or any deadline already 

fixed by Court order in this case; 

NOW THEREFORE, Plaintiff and DataPipe, by and through their respective counsel, 

hereby stipulate and inform the Court that the date of DataPipe’s response to Plaintiff’s 

Complaint is extended to March 5, 2010. 

 

Dated: January 14, 2010 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI 

Professional Corporation 

By: /s/ Michael J. Nader 

Michael J. Nader 

Attorneys for Defendant 

DataPipe, Inc. 

Dated: January 14, 2010 SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN & 

ARNOLD LLP 

By: /s/ Amber Rye Brumfiel 

 Amber Rye Brumfiel 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Quality Technology 

Services Holding, LLC. 

Case 5:09-cv-05133-JF Document 37 Filed 01/27/10 Page 2 of 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 

-2- 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR DEFENDANT DATAPIPE, INC.’S RESPONSE TO 

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 

CV-09-5133 (JF) 

PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 2010 

By: 

 Honorable Jeremy Fogel 

United States District Judge 

19,

Case 5:09-cv-05133-JF Document 37 Filed 01/27/10 Page 3 of 3