Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-02658/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-02658-13/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

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

ORDER REGARDING REQUEST FOR CMC—No. C-08-02658 RMW

CCL

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

E-FILED on 4/13/10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

MANDANA D. FARHANG, an individual,

Plaintiff,

v.

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,

KHARAGPUR; TECHNOLOGY

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND TRAINING

SOCIETY; PARTHA P. CHAKRABARTI;

PALLAB DASGUPTA; GURASHISH S.

BRAR; RAKESH GUPTA; PRAVANJAN

CHOUDHURY; SUBRAT PANDA;

ANIMESH NASKAR,

Defendants.

No. C-08-02658 RMW

ORDER REGARDING REQUEST FOR CMC

[Re Docket No. 117]

The court has received plaintiff's letter requesting a case management conference on May 28,

2010 as well as defendant Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur's ("IIT") letter opposing

plaintiff's request. IIT correctly observes that Civil L.R. 7-1(a) requires a motion as the means for

asking for a court order. However, the court will treat the letter request as a motion under Civil L.R.

6-1 for an order setting a case management conference on shortened time and to allow the

commencement of discovery. In the future, strict compliance with procedural rules will be required.

Case 3:08-cv-02658-WHO Document 119 Filed 04/13/10 Page 1 of 3
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

ORDER REGARDING REQUEST FOR CMC—No. C-08-02658 RMW

CCL 2

The holding of a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) Conference has been postponed for a

number of reasons including the delay in service of IIT, the motion to disqualify counsel, motions to

dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction and other alleged deficiencies, and the filing of

amended complaints. The court wants to expeditiously move this case forward but also does not

want the parties to spend unnecessary time or incur substantial costs on issues that may be dismissed

or have to be re-litigated once a currently unserved party is served and appears. 

The parties are to meet and confer by voice communication and then submit a joint plan for

limited written discovery and disclosures pending the outcome of the current Motion to Dismiss the

Second Amended Complaint and the setting of a Case Management Conference. If the parties are

unable to reach agreement on such a discovery plan, they may submit on or before May 7, 2010 their

individual proposals, and the court will order what, if any, discovery may be commenced. Any

proposal submitted by plaintiff should specify when she anticipates that all defendants will have

been served. If either party is concerned about the need to preserve any particular type or category

of document, that type or category should be identified. The parties, of course, currently are under

an obligation to maintain relevant documents.

The motion to shorten time for the setting of a Case Management Conference and to

Commence Discovery is otherwise denied without prejudice.

DATED: 4/13/10

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-02658-WHO Document 119 Filed 04/13/10 Page 2 of 3
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

ORDER REGARDING REQUEST FOR CMC—No. C-08-02658 RMW

CCL 3

Notice of this document has been electronically sent to:

Counsel for Plaintiff:

Micah R. Jacobs mjacobs@mbvlaw.com 

Counsel for Defendant IIT:

I. Neel Chatterjee nchatterjee@orrick.com 

Nitin Gambhir ngambhir@orrick.com 

Theresa Ann Sutton tsutton@orrick.com 

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel that have not

registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program.

Dated: 4/13/10 CCL

Chambers of Judge Whyte

Case 3:08-cv-02658-WHO Document 119 Filed 04/13/10 Page 3 of 3