Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00069/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00069-2/pdf.json

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

---

TINGLEY LAW GROUP

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

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

25F7DF99.doc STIPULATED REQUEST RE: MOTION TO DISMISS

CASE NO. CV15-00069 EMC

CURTIS R. TINGLEY (SBN 112322)

ctingley@tingleylawgroup.com

STEPHEN D. COLLINS (SBN 277482)

scollins@tingleylawgroup.com

KEVIN W. ISAACSON (SBN 281067)

kisaacson@tingleylawgroup.com

TINGLEY LAW GROUP, PC

10 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 430

San Jose, California 95113

Telephone: (408) 283-7000

Facsimile: (408) 283-7010

Attorneys for Plaintiff

E & E CO., LTD.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

E & E CO., LTD., a California corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

LIGHT IN THE BOX LIMITED, a Hong Kong 

corporation,

Defendant.

CASE NO. CV15-00069 EMC

STIPULATED REQUEST AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING 

TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE 

OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO 

DISMISS AND FOR DEFENDANT 

TO REPLY IN SUPPORT OF 

MOTION TO DISMISS

WHEREAS, Plaintiff, E & E Co., Ltd. (“Plaintiff” or “E & E”), filed a Complaint in the 

above-captioned case against Defendant, Light In The Box Limited (“Defendant” or “LITB 

Limited”), on January 7, 2015, Dkt. No. 1 (“the Complaint”);

WHEREAS, Defendant LITB Limited filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint on 

August 5, 2015; 

WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s Opposition to the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is currently due 

on August 19, 2015;

WHEREAS, Defendant’s Reply to the Plaintiff’s Opposition is currently due on 

August 26, 2015;

WHEREAS, the Court reset the hearing on the Motion to Dismiss from September 10, 

Case 3:15-cv-00069-EMC Document 33 Filed 08/19/15 Page 1 of 2
TINGLEY LAW GROUP

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

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

25F7DF99.doc - 2 - STIPULATED REQUEST RE: MOTION TO DISMISS

CASE NO. CV15-00069 EMC

2015, to September 24, 2015, at 1:30 p.m., in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff has not yet received a returned Proof of Service from the 

appropriate court in Hong Kong; 

WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant conferred and agreed to extend the 

Plaintiff’s deadline to file an opposition to the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss by seven (7) days 

and to extend the Defendant’s deadline to file a Reply in Support of the Motion to Dismiss by 

seven (7) days; 

THEREFORE, Plaintiff and Defendant hereby stipulate that: 

1. The deadline to file and serve Plaintiff’s Opposition to the Defendant’s Motion to 

Dismiss be reset to August 26, 2015;

2. The deadline to file and serve Defendant’s Reply in Support of the Motion to 

Dismiss be reset to September 2, 2015.

Dated: August 17, 2015 SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP

By: /s/ Harrison J. Frahn IV

Harrison J. Frahn IV

Attorneys for Defendants

Dated: August 17, 2015 TINGLEY LAW GROUP, PC

By: /s/ Stephen D. Collins

Stephen D. Collins

Attorneys for Plaintiff

ORDER

Pursuant to Stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August ___, 2015

Edward M. Chen

United States District Judge

19

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:15-cv-00069-EMC Document 33 Filed 08/19/15 Page 2 of 2