Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02182/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02182-1/pdf.json

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

---

STIPULATION AND ORDER

EXTENSION OF TIME

Case No. 06-2182 MHP

PATRICIA S. MAR (CA SBN 45593)

pmar@mofo.com

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

425 Market Street

San Francisco, California 94105-2482

Telephone: 415.268.7000

Facsimile: 415.268.7522

Attorneys for Plaintiff

CARL H. LOEWENSON, JR., COURT-APPOINTED 

RECEIVER FOR CREDIT BANCORP, LTD.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CARL H. LOEWENSON, JR., COURT- APPOINTED RECEIVER FOR CREDIT 

BANCORP, LTD.,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNIVERSAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, 

INC. (formerly World Wide Wireless 

Communications, Inc.),Defendant.

Case No. C 06-2182 MHP

AMENDED

SECOND STIPULATION TO 

MODIFY SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT SCHEDULE 

 AND ORDER 

This stipulation is entered into by and between Plaintiff Carl H. Loewenson, Jr., as court- appointed receiver of Credit Bancorp, Ltd., and Universal Communication Systems (formerly 

World Wide Wireless Communications, Inc.), by and through their attorneys, with reference to 

the following recitals:

A. At a telephone Case Management Conference held on July 25, 2006, the Court set 

a briefing and hearing schedule for plaintiff’s summary judgment motion, which is reflected in 

the Civil Pretrial Minutes dated July 25, 2006 [Docket No. 13] and which provided for the filing 

of a summary judgment motion by September 12, 2006, defendant’s opposition to be filed and 

Case 3:06-cv-02182-MHP Document 21 Filed 12/06/2006 Page 1 of 5
 Case 3:06-cv-02182-MHP Document 22 Filed 12/08/06 Page 1 of 5
STIPULATION AND ORDER

EXTENSION OF TIME

Case No. 06-2182 MHP 2

served by October 2, 2006, plaintiff’s reply to be filed and served by October 12, 2006, and the 

motion to be heard on October 23, 2006. 

B. Pursuant to Stipulation and Order entered on September 21, 2006 [Docket No. 14- 1], the summary judgment schedule was modified to coincide with an extension of the schedule 

for conducting the court-ordered mediation in this case, so that defendant’s opposition to the 

motion would not be required until after the mediation was held. The modified schedule 

provided that the summary judgment motion was to be filed by October 27, 2006, defendant’s 

opposition was to be filed and served by November 17, 2006, the reply to the opposition was to 

be filed and served by November 30, 2006, and the hearing on the motion was scheduled for 

December 11, 2006. 

C. On October 27, 2006, plaintiff filed its summary judgment motion (the “Motion”), 

in compliance with the September 21, 2006 order. The mediation was conducted on November 9, 

2006, as scheduled, but did not result in a settlement. 

D. Defendant has requested a further modification of the summary judgment 

schedule, on the ground that defendant needs more time to conduct discovery and prepare and file 

its opposition to the Motion. Plaintiff contends that defendant has had adequate time to conduct 

any investigation and discovery since this action was filed on March 27, 2006 and served on 

March 30, 2006. Nonetheless, to avoid litigation over whether defendant is entitled to further 

time to respond to the Motion, plaintiff has agreed to an extension of defendant’s time to oppose 

the Motion and to continue the hearing on the Motion, but only on the terms and conditions set 

forth herein.

WHEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED AS FOLLOWS:

1. The summary judgment schedule shall be extended and modified as follows:

(a) Defendant shall file and serve its opposition to the Motion on or before 

January 11, 2007. Service shall be by e-filing notification or other method of service that 

provides for same-day receipt of the opposition papers by plaintiff.

Case 3:06-cv-02182-MHP Document 21 Filed 12/06/2006 Page 2 of 5
 Case 3:06-cv-02182-MHP Document 22 Filed 12/08/06 Page 2 of 5
STIPULATION AND ORDER

EXTENSION OF TIME

Case No. 06-2182 MHP 3

. (b) Plaintiff shall file and serve its reply to the opposition on or before January 

29, 2007. Service shall be by e-filing notification or other method of service that provides for 

same-day receipt of the reply papers by defendant.

(c) The hearing on the Motion shall be held at 2 p.m. on February 12, 2007. 2. The extension of the summary judgment schedule shall be for the purpose of 

enabling defendant to seek the following discovery or investigation: (1) the broker/dealer who 

handled the transactions of the shares’ (2) the lawyers who drew up the agreements; (3) Douglas

Haffer; (4) former directors of Credit bank Corp; (5) previous directors of WLGS. 3. Defendant agrees that it will not seek, either from plaintiff or from the Court, any 

further extension of time to oppose the Motion or further continuance of the hearing or other 

proceedings on the Motion, for any reason, including but not limited to any request under Rule 

56(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, regardless of whether defendant has been able to 

complete or obtain the discovery it seeks. Defendant agrees that if its opposition to the Motion is 

not filed and served by the January 11, 2007 deadline, plaintiff may seek an order by ex-parte 

application granting the Motion by default.

4. Defendant agrees that in the event defendant plans to submit an affidavit or 

declaration from Douglas Haffer, former chief executive officer of defendant, in opposing the 

Motion, defendant shall cause Mr. Haffer to be available to plaintiff for deposition, upon 

plaintiff’s request, prior to the deadline for filing of plaintiff’s reply and no later than January 15, 

2007. 

5. On or before December 15, 2006, Defendant shall file a written response under 

Rule 34(b) to plaintiff’s First Request for Production of Documents to Defendant (the “Document 

Request”). Defendant has previously produced documents to Plaintiff and shall produce any 

additional documents required to be produced under the Document Request on or before 

December 28, 2006.

6. Nothing herein shall affect or limit plaintiff’s right to conduct discovery or seek 

other relief during the pendency of the Motion. 

Case 3:06-cv-02182-MHP Document 21 Filed 12/06/2006 Page 3 of 5
 Case 3:06-cv-02182-MHP Document 22 Filed 12/08/06 Page 3 of 5
Case 3:06-cv-02182-MHP Document 21 Filed 12/06/2006 Page 4 of 5
 Case 3:06-cv-02182-MHP Document 22 Filed 12/08/06 Page 4 of 5
STIPULATION AND ORDER

EXTENSION OF TIME

Case No. 06-2182 MHP 4

 .Dated: November 29, 2006

PATRICIA S. MAR

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

By:

Patricia S. Mar

Attorneys for Plaintiff

CARL H. LOEWENSON, JR., COURT- APPOINTED RECEIVER FOR CREDIT 

BANCORP, LTD.

MARK O. VAN WAGONER

By: _________________________

 Mark O. Van Wagoner

Attorneys for Defendant

UNIVERSAL COMMNICATIONS 

SYSTEMS, INC.

ORDER

Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. ________________________________ U.S. District Judge

sf-2237547

Case 3:06-cv-02182-MHP Document 21 Filed 12/06/2006 Page 5 of 5

Dated: 12/7/06

Case 3:06-cv-02182-MHP Document 22 Filed 12/08/06 Page 5 of 5