Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-07169/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-07169-2/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

*E-filed 10/24/07*

NOT FOR CITATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

DIGITAL NETWORKS NORTH AMERICA,

INC. a Delaware Corporation, 

Plaintiff,

v.

NUMARK INDUSTRIES, LLC, a Rhode Island

limited liability company, 

Defendant.

 /

Case No. C06-07169 HRL

ORDER ON MOTION TO SHORTEN

TIME FOR HEARING DEFENDANT'S

MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER

Re: Docket No. 52

This matter is before the Court on the Application of Defendant Numark Industries, LLC

for an Order Shortening Time on Motion for Protective Order; and Order Suspending

Deposition. The Court, having considered the Application and supporting documents submitted

in connection therewith, and finding good cause therefore, orders as follows: 

The Application for an Order Shortening Time is GRANTED. Opposition, if any, shall

be filed and served by Plaintiff on October 26, 2007. Defendant’s Reply, if any, shall be filed

and served on October 30, 2007. The matter shall be deemed submitted on the papers

following the reply deadline.

The deposition of Michael Grange currently noticed for October 30, 2007 is suspended

pending resolution of Defendant's Motion for a Protective Order.

Case 5:06-cv-07169-RMW Document 57 Filed 10/24/07 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 1 If either party fails to reasonably meet and confer, sanctions will be issued.

2

In the meantime, the parties are ordered to meet and confer regarding a mutually

convenient time to reschedule this deposition.1

 If the parties are unable to agree to a deposition

date prior to November 2 (the discovery cut-off date), Plaintiff may seek leave of the court to

conduct this deposition after the close of discovery. 

The parties shall immediately notify the court if this dispute is resolved.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 10/24/07 

HOWARD R. LLOYD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 5:06-cv-07169-RMW Document 57 Filed 10/24/07 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

3

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WILL BE SENT TO:

Dwight Craig Donovan Dwight@mbvlaw.com 

H. Ann Liroff ann.liroff@berliner.com, rebecca.revelez@berliner.com 

Byron L McMasters bmcmasters@duffysweeney.com, cscott@duffysweeney.com,

ehanson@duffysweeney.com, lspink@duffysweeney.com 

Jonathan Steven O'Donnell jon@mbvlaw.com, maxine@mbvlaw.com 

Steven D. Olson steveno@tonkon.com 

Craig M. Scott cscott@duffysweeney.com, ehanson@duffysweeney.com 

Frank James Weiss frank@tonkon.com, judya@tonkon.com 

* Counsel are responsible for providing copies of this order to co-counsel.

Dated: 10/24/07

 /s/ KRO 

Chambers of Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd

Case 5:06-cv-07169-RMW Document 57 Filed 10/24/07 Page 3 of 3