New Pacer--ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE (Signed By Judge)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Barco NV,
Plaintiff,
v.
Technology Properties Ltd., et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Presently before the Court is Plaintiff’s Request for a Case Management Conference.1
Plaintiff requests a Case Management Conference regarding a Motion to Strike2 which Plaintiff has
already filed, on the ground that on December 16, 2011, the Special Master decided that the Motion
to Strike “should be treated as dispositive” and directed Plaintiff to follow the procedures for
dispositive motions outlined in the Court’s October 5, 2011 Scheduling Order.3 (Request at 1.) To
date, Defendants have not filed an Opposition to Plaintiff’s Request. Upon review, the Court does not find good cause to grant Plaintiff’s Request for a Case Management Conference. In particular, the Court finds that a Case Management Conference is United States District Court For the Northern District of California unwarranted, in light of Plaintiff’s contentions that: (1) it has already “communicated with [Defendants’] counsel” regarding the Motion to Strike; and (2) Plaintiff and Defendants have reached agreement “regarding a briefing and hearing schedule” for the Motion. (Request at 3.) Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Request for a Case Management Conference and ORDERS as follows:
(1) On or before February 3, 2012, Defendants shall file their Opposition to the Motion
to Strike.
(2) On or before February 17, 2012, Plaintiff shall file its Reply.
(3) The January 23 hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike is continued to February 27,
2012 at 9 a.m.
Dated: January 10, 2012
(Signed By Judge)
JAMES WARE
United States District Chief Judge