Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-06083/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-06083-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 660
Nature of Suit: Occupational Safety And Health
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 5:09-cv-06083 RS 

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 

Daniel H. Fingerman (SBN 229683) 

MOUNT & STOELKER, P.C. 

River Park Tower 

333 W. San Carlos Street, Suite 1650 

San Jose, CA 95110 

Tel: (408) 279-7000 

Fax: (408) 998-1473 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

San Francisco Technology, Inc. 

Daralyn J. Durie (SBN 169825) 

Ryan M. Kent (SBN 220441) 

DURIE TANGRI LLP 

217 Leidesdorff Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Tel: (415) 362-6666 

Fax: (415) 236-6300 

ddurie@durietangri.com 

rkent@durietangri.com 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Pavestone Company LP 

UNTIED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

SAN FRANCISCO TECHNOLOGY INC., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED, THE 

BRITA PRODUCTS COMPANY, DELTA 

FAUCET COMPANY, EVANS 

MANUFACTURING, INC., THE EVERCARE 

COMPANY, GRAPHIC PACKAGING 

INTERNATIONAL INC., MAGNUM 

RESEARCH INC., PAVESTONE COMPANY 

LP, THE PROCTOR & GAMBLE COMPANY, 

S.C. JOHNSON & SON INC., SPECTRUM 

BRANDS INC., SUPER SWIM CORP., 

UNILOCK INC., WEST COAST CHAIN 

MFG. CO., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 5:09 cv-06083 RS 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO 

ANSWER COMPLAINT AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

*E-Filed 02/17/2010*

Case 5:09-cv-06083-RS Document 82 Filed 02/17/10 Page 1 of 4
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 5:09-cv-06083 RS 

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 

Pursuant to Local Rule 6-1 (a), Plaintiff San Francisco Technology Inc. stipulates and agrees 

that Defendant Pavestone Company LP (“Pavestone”) will have until March 1, 2010, to answer or 

otherwise respond to the Complaint filed by Plaintiff. This change will not alter the date of any event 

or any deadline already fixed by Court order. 

 THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties 

appearing below through their undersigned respective attorneys, that Pavestone will have until March 

1, 2010, to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint. 

Dated: February 16, 2010 DURIE TANGRI LLP 

By: /s/ Ryan M. Kent

 RYAN M. KENT 

 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Pavestone Company LP 

MOUNT & STOELKER, P.C. 

 By: /s/ Daniel H. Fingerman

 DANIEL H. FINGERMAN 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

San Francisco Technology, Inc. 

FILER’S ATTESTATION

Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B) regarding signatures, I, Ryan M. Kent, attest 

that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained.

 /s/ Ryan M. Kent 

 RYAN M. KENT 

Case 5:09-cv-06083-RS Document 82 Filed 02/17/10 Page 2 of 4
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 5:09-cv-06083 RS 

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 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: February _____, 2010 

 

 HON. RICHARD SEEBORG 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

17

Case 5:09-cv-06083-RS Document 82 Filed 02/17/10 Page 3 of 4
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 5:09-cv-06083 RS 

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 

PROOF OF SERVICE

I am employed in the City of San Francisco, County San Francisco, State of California, I am 

over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action. My business address is 217 Leidesdorff 

Street, San Francisco, CA 94111. On February 16, 2010, I caused copies of the attached 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT to be served on: 

 All parties with a copy of this document via the Court’s CM/ECF system. 

In addition, I caused a copy of the attached STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER 

COMPLAINT to be served on the following person(s) in this action by placing a true copy thereof 

enclosed in sealed envelope and addressed as follows: 

Mark B. Garred 

Stetina Brunda Garred & Brucker 

75 Enterprise, Suite 250 

Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 

(949)855-1246 

X (BY FIRST CLASS MAIL) I caused each such envelope to the addressee(s) noted above, with 

postage thereon fully prepaid, to be placed in the United States mail in San Francisco, 

California. I am readily familiar with the practice of Durie Tangri LLP for collection and 

processing of correspondence for mailing, said practice being that in the ordinary course of 

business mail is deposited in the United States Postal Service the same date as it is placed for 

collection. 

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is 

true and correct. Executed on February 16, 2010, at San Francisco, California. 

 /s/ Colette Aragon 

Colette Aragon 

Case 5:09-cv-06083-RS Document 82 Filed 02/17/10 Page 4 of 4