Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00349/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00349-21/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Matthew Budine
Counter Claimant
CAN Technologies, Inc.
Counter Defendant
Cargill Incorporated
Counter Defendant
Douglas W. DeGroff
Defendant
Diversified Dairy Solutions, LLC
Defendant
Luciana Jonkman
Counter Claimant
Progressive Dairy Solutions, Inc.
Counter Claimant
Todd Schwegel
Defendant
Brian Sundberg
Counter Claimant

Document Text:

1

STIPULATION REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE TO 

COUNTERCLAIMS - Case No. 07-CV-00349 LJO (SMS)

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

David J. Miclean (CSB# 115098/miclean@fr.com)

Katherine D. Prescott (CSB# 215496/prescott@fr.com)

Enrique D. Duarte (CSB# 247523/duarte@fr.com)

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

500 Arguello St., Suite 500 

Redwood City, CA 94063 

Tel: (650) 839-5070 

Fax: (650) 839-5071 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

CARGILL INCORPORATED and CAN TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

(FRESNO DIVISION) 

CARGILL INCORPORATED and CAN 

TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

 Plaintiffs, 

v. 

MATTHEW BUDINE; DOUGLAS W. 

DEGROFF; DIVERSIFIED DAIRY 

SOLUTIONS, LLC; LUCIANA JONKMAN; 

PROGRESSIVE DAIRY SOLUTIONS, 

INC.; TODD SCHWEGEL; BRIAN 

SUNDBERG, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 07-CV-00349 LJO (SMS) 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

REGARDING PLAINTIFFS CARGILL 

INCORPORATED AND CAN 

TECHNOLOGIES’ RESPONSE TO 

DEFENDANTS’ COUNTERCLAIMS 

TO THE COURT, TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 

WHEREAS Defendants PROGRESSIVE DAIRY SOLUTIONS, INC., MATTHEW 

BUDINE, LUCIANA JONKMAN, and BRIAN SUNDBERG (“Progressive Defendants”) filed 

various Counterclaims against Plaintiffs CARGILL INCORPORATED and CAN 

TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (“Plaintiffs”) to which, through stipulation by the parties, Plaintiffs must 

respond by June 8, 2007; 

WHEREAS Plaintiffs requested in writing that Progressive Defendants voluntarily amend 

certain counterclaims; and 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:07-cv-00349-LJO-SMS Document 94 Filed 06/05/07 Page 1 of 3
STIPULATION REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE TO 

COUNTERCLAIMS - Case No. 07-CV-00349 LJO (SMS)

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

WHEREAS Progressive Defendants agreed to consider Plaintiffs’ request, 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiffs, CARGILL 

INCORPORATED and CAN TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants, 

PROGRESSIVE DAIRY SOLUTIONS, INC., MATTHEW BUDINE, LUCIANA JONKMAN, and 

BRIAN SUNDBERG (“Progressive Defendants”), that: 

1. Progressive Defendants agree to respond to Plaintiffs’ request for voluntary 

amendment of counterclaims on or before June 15, 2007; 

2. If Progressive Defendants do not amend their counterclaims, Plaintiffs shall (i) file a 

motion to dismiss, or (ii) answer Progressive Defendants’ counterclaims, on or before June 22, 

2007; 

3. If Plaintiffs file a motion to dismiss less than all of Progressive Defendants’ 

counterclaims, Plaintiffs are not required to reply to any counterclaims until 10 days after the 

Court’s order on the motion to dismiss; 

4. If Progressive Defendants voluntarily amend their counterclaims, Plaintiffs shall 

respond within the statutorily allowed time period. 

This Stipulation is not entered into for purposes of delay, and will not alter the date of any 

event or any deadline already fixed by Court order. By entering into this stipulation, neither 

Plaintiffs nor Progressive Defendants waive any rights, claims or defenses they may have in this 

action. 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:07-cv-00349-LJO-SMS Document 94 Filed 06/05/07 Page 2 of 3
STIPULATION REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE TO 

COUNTERCLAIMS - Case No. 07-CV-00349 LJO (SMS)

3

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 STIPULATED AND AGREED. 

Dated: June 5, 2007 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

By: /s/ David J. Miclean 

David J. Miclean 

Katherine D. Prescott 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

CARGILL INCORPORATED and CAN 

TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

Dated: June 5, 2007 KRIEG, KELLER, SLOAN, REILLEY & ROMAN LLP 

By: /s/ Christopher T. Holland 

(as authorized on June 1, 2007) 

Kenneth E. Keller 

Christopher T. Holland 

Attorneys for Defendants 

MATTHEW BUDINE; LUCIANA 

JONKMAN; PROGRESSIVE DAIRY 

SOLUTIONS, INC.; and BRIAN SUNDBERG 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 6/5/2007 

 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

Honorable Sandra M. Snyder 

United States Magistrate Judge 

#50418838 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:07-cv-00349-LJO-SMS Document 94 Filed 06/05/07 Page 3 of 3