Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-01946/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-01946-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 160
Nature of Suit: Stockholder's Suits
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Stockholders Suits

---

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

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FITEQ INC,

Plaintiff,

v.

VENTURE CORPORATION, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-01946-BLF 

ORDER SETTING SCHEDULE AND 

REFERRING DISCOVERY DISPUTES 

TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

[Re: ECF 255, 256]

The parties in the above-captioned action have been unable to come to agreements on a 

number of scheduling matters. Having received the parties’ most recent separate status reports 

regarding scheduling and other issues,1the Court has determined that the process of asking the 

parties to meet and confer in good faith regarding scheduling has failed. The Court hereby sets the 

following schedule:

Rebuttal Expert Report Deadline: June 5, 2015

Last Day to Hear Dispositive Motions: December 17, 2015

Pre-Trial Conference: April 21, 2016

Trial: May 9, 20162

 

1

The Court also demands that counsel for both parties review this district’s Guidelines for 

Professional Conduct, see http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/professional_conduct_guidelines, and

practice before this Court consistent with their obligations under these guidelines and Civil Local 

Rule 11-4(a), which demands lawyers admitted to this bar “practice with the honesty, care, and 

decorum required for the fair and efficient administration of justice.” (emphasis added). 

2 Defendant states it could be ready for trial “beginning May 11, 2016.” Because the Court begins 

trial on Monday mornings, and because Defendant does not indicate a reason they are unavailable 

beginning May 9, the Court sets this date to conform with its schedule.

Case 5:13-cv-01946-BLF Document 257 Filed 03/31/15 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

Plaintiff has already filed its motion for summary judgment, which is scheduled to be 

heard on April 9, 2015. The Court by this Order sets Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, 

if they choose to file one, for December 17, 2015. If Defendants want an earlier hearing on that 

motion, they shall reserve an available date with the Court, but they may not reserve any date after 

December 17, 2015. The parties may stipulate to a briefing schedule for that motion, but 

Defendants’ reply brief must be filed with the Court at least 3 weeks prior to the hearing date. Any 

other scheduling disputes may be determined by the parties through stipulation. If the parties are 

unable to resolve a scheduling dispute, they may contact the Court to obtain a date for a Case 

Management Conference. They are not to file further separate status reports. 

All other disputes regarding discovery are hereby referred to Judge Paul Singh Grewal, 

including the non-scheduling disputes outlined by the parties in their separate status reports

regarding the scope of discovery and further depositions. See ECF 255, 256. The parties shall 

comply with Judge Grewal’s standing order regarding any and all further discovery disputes. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 31, 2015

______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:13-cv-01946-BLF Document 257 Filed 03/31/15 Page 2 of 2