Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-01346/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-01346-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

---

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, page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

EXPRESS DIAGNOSTICS INT’L, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

BARRY M. TYDING, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________

AND RELATED CROSS ACTION

___________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: C 06-1346 JW (PVT)

ORDER CONTINUING TO MAY 27,

2008, HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER

On March 13, 2008, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Protective Order and Request for Stay

Pending Resolution of Location and PMKs for Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of Express Diagnostics

International (“Plaintiff’s Motion for Protective Order”). The motion has been fully briefed. 

However, on April 9, 2008 District Judge Ware issued an order granting attorney William N.

Woodson’s motion to withdraw as counsel for certain Defendants, in which Judge Ware also stayed

all pending filing deadlines for 30 days and set a further Case Management Conference for June 16,

2008 to discuss the posture of the case in light of Mr. Woodson’s withdrawal. In light of Judge

Ware’s order,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Protective Order is

continued to 10:00 a.m. on May 27, 2008. Attorney Woodson had filed a declaration in opposition

Case 5:06-cv-01346-JW Document 188 Filed 04/10/08 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

ORDER, page 2

to Plaintiff’s Motion for Protective Order on behalf of all of his clients, including those whom he has

now withdrawn from representing – Defendants Barry M. Tydings, Merina T. Kisera, Zyon Int’l,

Inc., and Premium Diagnostics, Inc. (“the Unrepresented Parties”). The Unrepresented Parties are

entitled to appear and/or be represented at the hearing on Plaintiff’s motion. Thus, it would be

inappropriate to conduct the hearing before each of the Unrepresented Parties has either retained new

counsel and/or elected to appear pro se. Judge Ware has set May 9, 2008 as the deadline for the

Unrepresented Parties to either identify substitute counsel or else file a notice of intent to selfrepresent. Once the Unrepresented Parties have done so, they may need some time to prepare for the

hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Protective Order. Thus, the court has scheduled the hearing for a

little over two weeks after the May 9 deadline. th

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that attorney Woodson shall promptly provide a copy of this

order to the Unrepresented Parties, and, if they retain substitute counsel, to their new counsel

promptly after that counsel substitutes in.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, absent agreement of all parties or further order of the

court, the subject deposition(s) are stayed pending resolution of Plaintiff’s Motion for Protective

Order.

Dated: 4/9/08

 

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:06-cv-01346-JW Document 188 Filed 04/10/08 Page 2 of 2