Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02311/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02311-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

---

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 

JOINT STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER

Case No. C 06-2311 SC 

 1 

ROY S. GORDET (SBN 103916) 

98 Battery Street, Suite 601 

San Francisco, California 94111 

Telephone: (415) 627-0300 

Facsimile: (415) 627-9020 

roy@gordetlaw.com 

Attorney for Defendants 

PHILIP CUSHWAY a/k/a PHIL CUSHWAY and ARTROCK, INC. 

KENNETH A. FEINSWOG (SBN 129562) 

6100 Center Drive, Suite 630 

Los Angeles, California 90045 

Telephone: (310) 846-5800 

Facsimile: (310) 846-5801 

Attorney for Plaintiffs BRAVADO INTERNATIONAL GROUP MERCHANDISING SERVICES, 

INC. and BRAVADO INTERNATIONAL GROUP, LIMITED 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

BRAVADO INTERNATIONAL GROUP 

MERCHANDISING SERVICES, INC. 

and BRAVADO INTERNATIONAL 

GROUP, LIMITED, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

PHILIP CUSHWAY a/k/a PHIL 

CUSHWAY and ARTROCK, INC., 

 

 Defendants. 

) 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No: C 06-2311 SC 

STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF ALL 

COURT DEADLINES AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER THEREON 

On July 28, 2006, this Honorable Court issued a scheduling order pursuant to a Joint Case 

Management Conference Statement and a Case Management Conference held before the Court on 

July 28, 2006. 

Case 3:06-cv-02311-SC Document 23 Filed 02/06/07 Page 1 of 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 

JOINT STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER

Case No. C 06-2311 SC 

 2 

The parties participated in an ENE held on October 4, 2006, as well as a follow-up 

telephone session with the Evaluator on October 18, 2006. Since that time, the parties have been 

engaged in discovery. 

Several issues on both sides have arisen concerning the scope of production of documents 

and the relevance of certain interrogatories. The parties have been meeting and conferring 

regarding the disputes with progressive movement forward. Both parties believe that working 

through these issues rather than seeking judicial intervention will continue to prove fruitful. 

However, in order to fully address and resolve the remaining disagreements, to complete in-depth 

investigations regarding production, and avoid any judicial intervention through motion practice, 

the parties jointly seek an extension of time. 

Therefore, the parties jointly request the Court continue all deadlines in the Court’s Order 

dated July 28, 2006 for 90 days. 

 Current Dates Proposed Dates

Close of Discovery: March 14, 2007 June 14, 2007 

Last Day to Hear Dispositive Motions: April 27, 2007 July 27, 2007 

Trial Date: May 14, 2007 August 13, 2007 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Date: February 1 , 2007 __/roysgordet/______________ 

Roy S. Gordet, 

Attorney for Defendants 

Philip Cushway a/k/a Phil Cushway and ArtRock, Inc. 

 

Date: February 1, 2007 /kenneth a. feinswog/

Kenneth A. Feinswog, 

Attorney for Plaintiffs 

Bravado International Group Merchandising Services, 

Inc. and Bravado International Group, Limited 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

____________________________ Date: _____________, 2007 

U.S. District Judge 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Samuel Conti

2/5

Case 3:06-cv-02311-SC Document 23 Filed 02/06/07 Page 2 of 2