Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-00536/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-00536-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 18:1836(b) Civil Action to Protect Trade Secrets

---

1

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

Charles K. Manock SB#161633

MANOCK LAW

448 W Shaw Ave.

Fresno, CA 93704

Phone: 559-696-4397

Fax: 559-422-5163

Attorney for Defendants AGRIGENIX, LLC and SEAN MAHONEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO DIVISION

DEERPOINT GROUP, INC., an Illinois

corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

AGRIGENIX, LLC, a Delaware limited

liability company; SEAN MAHONEY, a

California individual; and CUSTOM AG

FORMULATORS, INC., a California

corporation,

Defendants.

Case No: l:18-cv-00536-AWI-BAM

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

EXTENDING DEADLINE TO ANSWER 

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

.

Pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 143, Plaintiff Deerpoint Group, Inc. 

(“DPG”) and Defendants AGRIGENIX, LLC, SEAN MAHONEY, a California individual; and 

CUSTOM AG FORMULATORS, INC., a California corporation, (collectively “Defendants”) 

hereby stipulate as follows: 

1. The Second Amended Complaint includes a cause of action for patent infringement;

defendants are associating an additional attorney specializing in patent litigation.

2. Defendants have requested that Plaintiff extend the deadline for filing an Answer to the 

Second Amended Complaint.

3. Plaintiff has no objection to providing the requested extension. 

Case 1:18-cv-00536-JLT-BAM Document 89 Filed 03/11/20 Page 1 of 4
2

Stipulation and Order Extending Deadline to Answer Second Amended Complaint

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

4. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and request that the Court extend the deadline

for Defendants to file an Answer to the Second Amended Complaint to March 23, 2020. No prior 

extensions of this subject matter have been sought by the parties, and the parties do not anticipate 

that this extension will alter any of the other existing deadlines as set forth in the Scheduling Order 

in this case. 

Dated: March 5, 2020 KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP

By: /s/ Jon Michaelson ___________

JON MICHAELSON

MANSI H. SHAH

ADAM WILEY

Attorneys for Plaintiff

DEERPOINT GROUP, INC.

Dated: March 5, 2020 ____/s/ Charles K. Manock____________________

Charles K. Manock, attorney for Defendants 

AGRIGENIX, LLC and SEAN MAHONEY

Dated: March 5, 2020 QUALL CARDOT, LLP

By: /s/ John M Cardot __________________

JOHN M. CARDOT

Attorneys for Defendant

CUSTOM AG FORMULATORS, INC.

Case 1:18-cv-00536-JLT-BAM Document 89 Filed 03/11/20 Page 2 of 4
3

Stipulation and Order Extending Deadline to Answer Second Amended Complaint

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

Local Rule 144(a) provides that “an initial stipulation extending time for no more than 

twenty-eight (28) days to respond to a complaint . . . may be filed without approval of the Court if 

the stipulation is signed on behalf of all parties who have appeared in the action and are affected by 

the stipulation.” All other extensions of time require Court approval. L.R. 144(a). 

Defendant Custom AG Formulators, Inc. was initially served with the summons and Second 

Amended Complaint on February 25, 2020, and no previous stipulations extending the time for this 

defendant to respond to a complaint have been filed with the Court. (See Doc. No. 83.) Therefore, 

as to Defendant Custom AG Formulators, Inc., the parties' stipulation conforms with the 

requirements of Local Rule 144(a) and requires no court order to be effective. 

However, the parties previously stipulated to extend the deadline for Defendants Agrigenix, 

LLC and Sean Mahoney to respond to the initial complaint. (Doc. No. 9.) Accordingly, as this is 

not an initial stipulation extending time for Defendants Agrigenix, LLC and Sean Mahoney to 

respond to a complaint, Court approval is required as to those defendants. See L.R. 144(a). While 

the stipulation does not explain the basis for the requested extension, based upon the parties’ 

consent to the amended deadline, and in the interest of justice, the Court finds that the parties’ 

request is warranted and no prejudice will result. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants Agrigenix, LLC and Sean 

Mahoney’s responses to the complaint shall be filed and served on or before March 23, 2020. The 

Court recognizes the parties' stipulation extending the deadline for Defendant Custom AG 

Formulators, Inc. to respond to the complaint to March 23, 2020, but no further order is required. 

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

Case 1:18-cv-00536-JLT-BAM Document 89 Filed 03/11/20 Page 3 of 4
4

Stipulation and Order Extending Deadline to Answer Second Amended Complaint

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

The parties are further reminded that a STATUS CONFERENCE has been set for May 5, 

2020, at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (BAM) before the undersigned to discuss any need to amend

the Scheduling Order in this case. At least one (1) full week prior to the Status Conference, the 

parties SHALL jointly submit any proposed dates they believe are necessary in light of the patent 

infringement claim. The parties are encouraged to appear at the status conference by telephone with 

each party using the following dial-in number and access code: dial-in number 1-877-411-9748; 

access code 3219139.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 10, 2020 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:18-cv-00536-JLT-BAM Document 89 Filed 03/11/20 Page 4 of 4