Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-03752/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-03752-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114 Trademark Infringement

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEVI STRAUSS & COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

 v.

 ABERCROMBIE & FITCH TRADING

COMPANY,

Defendant.

 /

No. C 07-03752 JSW

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

LEAVE TO FILE OVERSIZE

BRIEF, STRIKING OPPOSITION,

AND ORDERING REVISED

OPPOSITION TO BE FILED

On April 7, 2008, Defendant Abercrombie & Fitch Trading Company (“A&F”) filed a

motion for leave to file an oversize opposition brief to the motion to dismiss A&F’s

counterclaim, filed by Plaintiff Levi Strauss & Company (“LS&CO”). Although LS&CO does

not oppose, the Court does not find good cause to grant A&F’s request and the motion is

DENIED. 

In its Order granting LS&CO’s motion to disqualify A&F’s previous counsel, the Court

warned the parties that future violations of this Court’s Standing Orders might result in

sanctions. Thus, A&F, through counsel, did not merely overlook this Court’s Standing Orders,

it overlooked the explicit warning in the Order granting the motion to disqualify. A&F also

submitted a brief that did not comply with this Court’s local rules on the font size for footnotes. 

Accordingly, as a sanction, the Court HEREBY STRIKES the opposition brief filed on March

28, 2008. 

Case 3:07-cv-03752-JSW Document 82 Filed 04/09/08 Page 1 of 2
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

2

A&F shall file a revised opposition brief that complies with this Court’s Standing Order

6, and that complies with Northern District Civil Local Rule 3-4(c)(2) by April 16, 2008. 

A&F’s revised brief may not add any argument, because the Court shall not require LS&CO to

submit a revised reply brief. The hearing shall remain on calendar on April 25, 2008, unless the

Court notifies the parties that it deems the matter suitable for disposition without oral argument. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 9, 2008 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:07-cv-03752-JSW Document 82 Filed 04/09/08 Page 2 of 2