Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03836/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03836-28/pdf.json

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

---

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NSIGHT, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

PEOPLESOFT, INC.,

Defendant /

No. C 04-3836 MMC (MEJ)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING

TIME; CONTINUING HEARING ON

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO

AMEND COMPLAINT; CONTINUING

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE;

SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Before the Court is plaintiff’s Motion for an Order Shortening Time to Hear Its Motion

for an Extension of Discovery Cutoff, filed May 20, 2006; plaintiff’s Motion for an Extension

of Time to Conduct Discovery, filed May 20, 2006 and noticed for hearing May 26, 2006;

and plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint, filed February 28, 2006 and noticed

for hearing May 26, 2006.

With respect to its Motion for an Extension of Time to Conduct Discovery, plaintiff

has failed to show good cause exists to hear said motion on shortened time and has failed

to submit a supporting declaration as required by the Civil Local Rules of this District. 

Accordingly, the Court hereby DENIES plaintiff’s motion for an order shortening time and

SETS the following briefing schedule:

1. Plaintiff shall file, no later than May 26, 2006, a declaration in support of the

factual assertions made in its Motion for an Extension of Time to Conduct Discovery.

Case 3:04-cv-03836-MMC Document 139 Filed 05/23/06 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

2

2. Defendant’s opposition or other response shall be filed no later than June 9,

2006.

3. Plaintiff’s reply, if any, shall be filed no later than June 16, 2006.

4. The hearing on the motion shall be conducted on June 30, 2006 at 9:00 a.m.

With respect to plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint, the Court hereby

DIRECTS each party to file a supplemental brief with respect to such motion and

CONTINUES the hearing thereon, as follows:

1. Plaintiff shall file, no later than June 9, 2006, a supplemental brief stating, with

respect to each proposed amendment of, or addition to, the Third Amended Complaint, with

the exception of the proposed changes to ¶ 20.f., the purpose of such amendment/

addition. Additionally, plaintiff shall state whether any of the new facts it seeks to include

were disclosed to defendant before the discovery cut-off date of December 30, 2005.

2. In response thereto, defendant shall file, no later than June 16, 2006, a

supplemental opposition, and, further, shall explain the basis for its assertion that the

proposed amendments would “significantly chang[e] the factual basis for the action.” (See

Def.’s Opp., filed May 5, 2006, at 1:26-27.)

3. The hearing on plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend is continued to June 30, 2006

at 9:00 a.m.

In the interests of judicial economy, the Case Management Conference is hereby

CONTINUED from May 26, 2006 to June 30, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. No further case

management statement is required, absent a change in the relevant circumstances. If a

further statement is necessary, such statement shall be filed no later than June 23, 2006

and shall consist of a single Joint Statement. If necessary, the parties may include therein

separate sections setting forth their respective positions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 23, 2006 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:04-cv-03836-MMC Document 139 Filed 05/23/06 Page 2 of 2