Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04050/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04050-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114 Trademark Infringement

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

REAL ACTION PAINTBALL, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

ADVANCED TACTICAL ORDNANCE 

SYSTEMS, LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

UNITED TACTICAL SYSTEMS LLC,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

REAL ACTION PAINTBALL, INC., et al.,

 Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-02435-MEJ 

ORDER MODIFYING PRIOR 

SCHEDULING ORDER

Case No. 14-cv-04050-MEJ 

On January 22, 2015, the Court held a joint Case Management Conference with the Lead 

Counsel in the related cases, Real Action Paintball, Inc. v. Advanced Tactical Ordnance Systems, 

LLC, C-14-2435-MEJ (the “ATO Case”) and United Tactical Systems LLC v. Real Action 

Paintball Inc., C-14-4050-MEJ (the “UTS Case”). The Court previously consolidated various 

motions related to both the UTS and ATO cases. ATO case, Dkt. No. 130; UTS Case, Dkt. No. 

117 (the “Jan. 7 Order”). Now, in lieu of the parties’ discussion in the joint Case Management 

Conference, the Court hereby modifies the Jan. 7 Order as follows: 

1) RAP4’s opposition to the motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction (ATO 

Case, Dkt. Nos. 13, 39; UTS Case, Dkt. No. 96) is due in both cases on March 12, 

2015. The opposition shall be filed as one document and spread across the dockets of 

Case 3:14-cv-04050-SK Document 127 Filed 01/26/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

both the ATO and UTS case (i.e., the opposition should be available in both cases). 

2) The parties moving for lack of personal jurisdiction in both cases shall file a joint reply 

to RAP4’s opposition, due on March 26, 2015. The joint reply shall be filed as one 

document and spread across the dockets of both the ATO and UTS case.

3) Given that the parties will have fewer pages to oppose and reply to the motions than 

they otherwise would, the Court will permit RAP4’s opposition to extend to 30 pages, 

and the joint reply to extend to 20 pages. 

4) The Court will hold a joint hearing on these jurisdictional motions on April 9, 2015 at 

10:00 a.m. in Courtroom B. 

In all other respects, the Jan. 7 Order remains operative.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 26, 2015

______________________________________

MARIA-ELENA JAMES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:14-cv-04050-SK Document 127 Filed 01/26/15 Page 2 of 2