Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03887/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03887-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 422
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Appeals Rule 28 USC 158
Cause of Action: 28:0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BAP)

---

1

___________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER CHANGING TIME OF BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Paravue Corporation v. Heller Ehrman, LLP – No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

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

James V. Weixel (166024)

WEIXEL LAW OFFICE

150 Post Street, Suite 520

San Francisco, California 94108

Telephone: (415) 691-7495

Facsimile: (866) 640-3918

Email: appeals@jimweixel.com

Attorney for Appellant

PARAVUE CORPORATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

PARAVUE CORPORATION,

Appellant,

v.

HELLER EHRMAN, LLP,

Appellee.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

Hon. Charles R. Breyer

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER 

CHANGING TIME OF BRIEFING 

SCHEDULE

ORDER

Pursuant to Local Rule 7-12, Appellant PARAVUE CORPORATION and Appellee HELLER 

EHRMAN, LLP, by and through their respective undersigned counsel, stipulate and agree to an 

extension of the briefing deadlines in this appeal, in the respects stated herein.

In support of this stipulation, the undersigned counsel for Appellant, James V. Weixel, states and 

declares as follows:

1. I am an attorney at law licensed to practice before all courts of the State of California, and 

am a member of the bar of this Court. I am counsel of record in this proceeding for Appellant Paravue 

Case 3:14-cv-03887-CRB Document 27 Filed 02/11/15 Page 1 of 5
2

___________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER CHANGING TIME OF BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Paravue Corporation v. Heller Ehrman, LLP – No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

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

Corporation. I have personal knowledge of the matters stated in this Declaration and, if called to testify 

thereto, could and would do so truthfully and competently.

2. I make this Declaration pursuant to Local Rule 6-2 in support of the parties’ stipulation 

for an extension of the briefing schedule in this matter.

3. By previous agreement of the parties and the order of the Court, Paravue’s opening brief 

to this Court is due by February 16, 2015, Heller Ehrman’s answering brief is due by April 6, 2015, and 

Paravue’s reply brief is due by April 20, 2015.

4. On December 19, 2015, Paravue filed a motion for a limited remand of this matter to the 

bankruptcy court for the purpose of allowing that court to consider and determine Paravue’s motion for 

reconsideration of the summary judgments granted in Heller Ehrman’s favor on the claims which are the 

subject of this appeal. The parties agreed to continue the hearing until February 6, 2015. However, the 

Court, sua sponte, set the hearing for February 20, 2015, which presumably was the Court’s next 

available hearing date. Briefing on the motion has been completed, with the exception of a corrective

supplement (without further argument) that Paravue plans to file no later than the end of business on 

Monday, February 9, 2015.

5. The parties had originally agreed to the above hearing and briefing schedule in part 

because the motion for limited remand would have been heard before the appellate briefing commenced. 

However, the Court’s setting of the hearing on the motion for limited remand for February 20th resulted 

in that motion being scheduled for hearing after Paravue’s opening appellate brief is due to be filed on 

February 16th, which is in the reverse order agreed upon by the parties in the previous stipulation. 

Accordingly, on February 6, 2015, I contacted Heller Ehrman’s counsel, Marjorie E. Manning, Esq., to 

propose an extension of all deadlines in the appellate briefing schedule. Ms. Manning advised me it is 

her position the outcome of the February 20th hearing on the motion to remand will not alter the nature 

or scope of the appeal before this Court and thus provides no basis for an additional extension of time to 

file Paravue’s opening brief. However, she agreed to stipulate to a one-week extension of the existing 

deadlines in the interest of professional cooperation and courtesy. 

6. As stated in the stipulation below, the parties have stipulated and agreed to the following 

revised briefing schedule as appropriate and reasonable:

Case 3:14-cv-03887-CRB Document 27 Filed 02/11/15 Page 2 of 5
3

___________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER CHANGING TIME OF BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Paravue Corporation v. Heller Ehrman, LLP – No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

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

Appellant’s opening brief due: February 23, 2015

Appellee’s brief due: April 13, 2015

Appellant’s reply brief due: April 27, 2015

7. There have been three stipulations for an extended briefing schedule, which have resulted 

in the current briefing schedule reflected in the Court’s order filed January 7, 2015 (Doc. 22).

8. The requested extension would cause the briefing schedule in this matter to be extended 

by one week with respect to all deadlines, as set forth above.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United 

States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 9th day of February, 2015, at San 

Francisco, California.

____________/s/ James V. Weixel___________________ James V. Weixel

STIPULATION

Appellant Paravue Corporation and Appellee Heller Ehrman, LLP, by and through their 

respective undersigned counsel, stipulate and agree, and thereupon request that the Court enter an order 

accordingly, to change time to reflect an extension of the briefing schedule in the appeal before this 

Court as follows:

Appellant’s opening brief due: February 23, 2015

Appellee’s brief due: April 13, 2015

Appellant’s reply brief due: April 27, 2015

This stipulation is made upon the declaration of James V. Weixel, Esq., counsel for Paravue 

Corporation in this proceeding, as stated supra.

The parties stipulate and agree to this briefing schedule and request that the Court enter an order 

accordingly, pursuant to Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12.

///

///

Case 3:14-cv-03887-CRB Document 27 Filed 02/11/15 Page 3 of 5
4

___________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER CHANGING TIME OF BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Paravue Corporation v. Heller Ehrman, LLP – No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

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

Dated: February 9, 2015. WEIXEL LAW OFFICE

By: /s/ James V. Weixel___________________ James V. Weixel

Attorney for Appellant

PARAVUE CORPORATION

Dated: February 9, 2015. BOLLING & GAWTHROP

By: /s/ Marjorie E. Manning___________________ Marjorie E. Manning (by consent)

Attorney for the Post-Confirmation Liquidating Debtor,

Appellee HELLER EHRMAN, LLP

ATTESTATION RE ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE(S)

I, James V. Weixel, counsel for Appellant Paravue Corporation, hereby attest pursuant to Local 

Rule 5-1(i)(3) that the electronic signature(s) of other counsel and/or parties appearing above indicate(s)

that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of said counsel and/or 

parties, and that such electronic signature(s) serve(s) in lieu of said signature(s) on the document.

Dated: February 9, 2015. WEIXEL LAW OFFICE

By: /s/ James V. Weixel___________________ James V. Weixel

Attorney for Appellant

PARAVUE CORPORATION

Case 3:14-cv-03887-CRB Document 27 Filed 02/11/15 Page 4 of 5
5

___________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER CHANGING TIME OF BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Paravue Corporation v. Heller Ehrman, LLP – No. 3:14-cv-3887 CRB

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

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

________________________________________ Signed: February 11, 2015 CHARLES R. BREYER Senior United States District Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Charles R. Breyer

Case 3:14-cv-03887-CRB Document 27 Filed 02/11/15 Page 5 of 5