Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06053/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06053-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 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

NETWORK APPLIANCE INC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC,

Defendant. /

No. C-07-06053 EDL

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE

RELIEF REQUESTING A PROMPT

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

AND SETTING CASE MANAGEMENT

CONFERENCE

On November 30, 2007, this case was transferred to this Court from the Eastern District of

Texas, and the initial case management was set automatically for March 11, 2008. On December 4,

2007, Plaintiff filed a motion for administrative relief requesting a prompt case management

conference for January 8, 2008 or not later than January 23, 2008, the date on which the case

management conference would have been held in the Texas court. On December 7, 2007, Defendant

filed an opposition to Plaintiff’s administrative motion. Also on December 7, 2007, Plaintiff filed a

reply. The Court has carefully reviewed each parties’ submissions and finds good cause to advance

the case management conference to late January, which maintains the pace at which the case was

proceeding in the Texas court. However, because the Court is unavailable from January 23, 2008

through January 25, 2008, the first date that the Court is available after January 23 is January 28. 

Accordingly, the initial case management conference is specially scheduled for January 28, 2008 at

2:00 p.m. A joint case management conference statement shall be filed no later than January 22,

2008. 

Originally, the parties jointly sought to expedite this case by having an early case

management conference, yet Defendant did not raise the issue of whether the presumptive deadlines

under the Patent Local Rules should be triggered by an early date as they normally would, absent

Case 3:07-cv-06053-EDL Document 9 Filed 12/11/07 Page 1 of 2
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

2

modification. Patent L.R. 2-1(a)(1). The Court has not pre-determined this issue. However, in view

of the parties’ expressed desire for an early case management conference and the parties’ stipulation

to transfer this case based in part on the ability to proceed expeditiously in this Court, the Court is

reluctant to grant a lengthy extension of deadlines. The parties shall meet and confer forthwith and

attempt to reach a resolution about the Patent Local Rules deadlines during their Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 26(f) meeting. The parties should be prepared to discuss this issue at the case

management conference. The parties should also be prepared to discuss how the other case

involving these parties, Sun Microsystems v. Network Appliance, C-07-5488 EDL, should be

coordinated with this case to the extent that they may overlap.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 11, 2007 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:07-cv-06053-EDL Document 9 Filed 12/11/07 Page 2 of 2