Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01550/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01550-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

YODLEE, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

 CASHEDGE, INC.,

Defendant. /

No. C 05-01550 SI

ORDER DENYING 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL

By letter brief filed August 24, 2006, plaintiff Yodlee, Inc. seeks to compel production of

documents relating to the computer source code and associated technical documentation for defendant

CashEdge Inc.'s Data Aggregation Products. Plaintiff also seeks to compel defendant to propose dates

for the deposition of its Rule 30(b)(6) designees. In its letter brief filed August 28, 2006, defendant

responded that it was preparing a responsive document production, for delivery to plaintiff the week

ending September 1, 2006. Further, defendant stated that it would offer dates for the Rule 30(b)(6)

depositions following completion of mediation, which was scheduled for September 19, 2006. It

therefore appears that no intervention of the Court is necessary at this time, as defendant has produced

a responsive document production, and the parties should this week be scheduling the depositions at

issue. Should defendant’s anticipated responses not be satisfactory, plaintiff may submit further letter

briefs. For the above reasons, the Court hereby DENIES the motion to compel. (Docket # 73) 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 25, 2006 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-01550-SI Document 83 Filed 09/25/06 Page 1 of 1