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

 

SECOND JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR MODIFICATION OF 

CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE AND TRIAL DATE 

CASE NO. CV-09-1153 MHP 1 

TOWNSEND AND TOWNSEND AND CREW LLP 

PAUL W. VAPNEK (State Bar No. 36576) 

MARC M. GORELNIK (State Bar No. 166833) 

DAVID SCHNAPF (State Bar No. 100199) 

MEGAN M. CHUNG (State Bar No. 232044) 

Two Embarcadero Center, Eighth Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 576-0200 

Facsimile: (415) 576-0300 

Email: pwvapnek@townsend.com

Email: mmgorelnik@townsend.com

Email: dschnapf@townsend.com

Email: mmchung@townsend.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant 

Z-LINE DESIGNS, INC. 

JONES DAY 

ARTHUR S. BEEMAN (State Bar No.237996) 

PAMELA K. FULMER (State Bar No. 154736) 

NOEL RODRIGUEZ (State Bar No. 228784) 

M. ANDERSON BERRY (State Bar No. 262879) 

555 California Street, 26th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 626-3939 

Facsimile: (415) 875-5700 

Email: asbeeman@jonesday.com

Email: pkfulmer@jonesday.com

Email: nrodrigez@jonesday.com

Email: aberry@jonesday.com

Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant 

PLANET 3, LLC 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

Z-LINE DESIGNS, INC., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

PLANET 3, LLC, 

Defendant. 

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS. 

Case No. CV-09-1153 MHP 

SECOND JOINT STIPULATION 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR 

MODIFICATION OF CASE 

MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE AND 

TRIAL DATE 

Judge: Honorable Marilyn Hall Patel 

Case 3:09-cv-01153-MHP Document 89 Filed 02/11/10 Page 1 of 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

 

SECOND JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR MODIFICATION OF 

CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE AND TRIAL DATE 

CASE NO. CV-09-1153 MHP 2 

WHEREAS, Z-Line Designs, Inc. (“Z-Line” or “Plaintiff”) and Defendant Planet 3, LLC 

(“Planet 3” or “Defendant”) are engaged in settlement discussions, which respective counsel believe 

will lead to a final resolution of this matter; 

 WHEREAS, the parties have reached a settlement-in-principle and are working to 

memorialize the terms of the settlement, with a written draft in circulation; 

 WHEREAS, the parties, mindful of this Court’s interest in having this case resolved, and 

confident of the parties’ ability to resolve this matter, are diligently working to reach a settlement. 

However, given the approaching close of fact discovery, the parties require additional time; 

 WHEREAS, counsel for the parties believe that an additional thirty (30) day suspension of 

applicable deadlines in this case will allow the parties and counsel to continue to devote their 

attention and resources to a final resolution of this matter. 

 WHEREAS, one previous suspension has been sought by the parties; 

 ACCORDINGLY, the parties, by and through their undersigned counsel, HEREBY 

STIPULATE as follows: 

 In order to avoid prejudicing the parties’ discovery efforts and trial preparations, and to 

allow the parties to focus on settlement negotiations, the parties agree and respectfully request that 

the current pre-trial schedule be modified as follows: 

1. The fact discovery cut-off, which is currently set for March 8, 2010, is extended to 

April 7, 2010. 

2. The deadline to designate experts, which is currently set for April 5, 2010, is 

extended to May 5, 2010. 

3. The deadline to designate rebuttal experts, which is currently set for May 10, 2010, is 

extended to June 9, 2010. 

4. The expert discovery cut-off, which is currently set for June 7, 2010, is extended to 

July 7, 2010. 

5. The hearing on dispositive motions, which is currently set for July 26, 2010, is reset 

for August 30, 2010, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the Court’s schedule permits. 

6. The pretrial conference, which is currently set for September 2, 2010, is adjourned to 

Case 3:09-cv-01153-MHP Document 89 Filed 02/11/10 Page 2 of 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

 

SECOND JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR MODIFICATION OF 

CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE AND TRIAL DATE 

CASE NO. CV-09-1153 MHP 3 

October 7, 2010, at 2:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the Court’s schedule permits. 

7. The trial date, which is current set for September 21, 2010, is adjourned to 

October 26, 2010, at 8:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the Court’s schedule permits. 

8. All other deadlines are tolled for thirty (30) days as of the date of this stipulation. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED BY THE PARTIES. 

Dated: February 9, 2010 TOWNSEND AND TOWNSEND AND CREW LLP 

 By ______/s/______________________________ 

 Marc M. Gorelnik 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Z-LINE DESIGNS, INC. 

Dated: February 9, 2010 JONES DAY 

 By ______/s/ _____________________________ 

 Arthur S. Beeman 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

 PLANET 3, LLC 

SIGNATURE ATTESTATION 

 Pursuant to General Order No. 45(X)(B), I hereby attest that I have obtained the 

concurrence in the filing of this document from counsel for Defendant for whom a signature is 

indicated by a “conformed” signature (/s/) within this e-filed document, and I have on file records 

to support this concurrence for subsequent production for the court, if so ordered, or for inspection 

upon request. 

Dated: February 9, 2010 ____/s/______________________________ 

 Marc M. Gorelnik 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: ____________________ ____________________________________ 

MARILYN HALL PATEL 

United States District Judge 

62446656 v1

8/10/2010

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Marilyn H. Patel

Case 3:09-cv-01153-MHP Document 89 Filed 02/11/10 Page 3 of 3