Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_17-cv-04732/USCOURTS-cand-4_17-cv-04732-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:501 Copyright 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

CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

POUNCE CONSULTING, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-04732-PJH 

ORDER RE MOTION TO WITHDRAW 

AS COUNSEL AND CASE SCHEDULE

Re: Dkt. Nos. 148, 151

Defendant Pounce Consulting, S.A. de C.V.’s (“Pounce Mexico”) counsel

(“Procopio”) has filed a motion to withdraw citing “an irreconcilable breakdown in the 

attorney-client relationship.” Dkt. 148-2, Declaration of Frederick K. Taylor, ¶ 6. Good 

cause appearing, that motion is GRANTED. Pursuant to L.R. 11-5(b), papers may 

continue to be served on Procopio for forwarding purposes for 30 days from the date of 

this order or until Pounce Mexico retains substitute counsel, which it shall do within that 

time period. 

In light of Procopio’s withdrawal, as well as plaintiff and defendant Pounce 

Consulting, Inc.’s stipulation, the court ORDERS as follows:

1. The deadline for expert disclosures shall be continued for 60 days from 

June 22, 2018, to August 22, 2018.

2. The parties will provide a further joint submission as to the case schedule 

on or before July 27, 2018.

3. Pounce Mexico shall file its answer within 14 days of retaining counsel but

no later than July 23, 2018. The court has no intention of granting any 

additional continuances relating to this deadline. 

Case 4:17-cv-04732-PJH Document 153 Filed 06/15/18 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

4. Any fact discovery that is already in progress may continue in the interim, 

although the parties reserve the right (and agree that non-parties may have 

the right) to object as “untimely” to any discovery served after May 25, 

2018, depending on what ultimately happens with the case schedule.

5. All other dates on the case schedule remain unchanged for now. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 15, 2018

__________________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:17-cv-04732-PJH Document 153 Filed 06/15/18 Page 2 of 2