"LOL by its nature, a Stipulation is joint,"

I agree....however....I wonder why e.Digital when filing a motion, as in recent fashion, that is mutual between the parties, does not use the full heading JOINT showing such?

We would not (Google motion aside) be the wiser up front of this current iBaby ruling...had the court not ruled on the complete heading of the motion....Action Filed: December 17, 2015 PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES’ JOINT STIPULATION REQUESTING MEDIATION UNDER ADR L.R. 6 AND FOR CONTINUANCE OF JULY 29, 2016 ADR DEADLINE, and
good cause appearing therefore, the Court orders that the July 29, 2016 deadline for Private ADR

IMVHO e.Digital is being somewhat evasive....where weeks back I mentioned this ....e.Digital is getting somewhat tight lipped,.be prepared.

I got this feeling after reading Googles exhibit 1025 and seeing that e.Digital's motion did not file as a joint consideration.

My consideration is about e.Digital's action ....not what a stipulation may or may not be in this case.
doni