PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST UNDER L.R. 7-11
TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE
-1-
Case No. C 06-2057 JF
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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
KINDERSTART.COM LLC, a California
limited liability company, on behalf of itself and
all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
GOOGLE, INC., a Delaware corporation,
Defendant.
Case No. C 06-2057 JF
PLAINTIFF’S ADMINISTRATIVE
REQUEST UNDER LOCAL RULE 7-11
REGARDING SCHEDULING, CASE
MANAGEMENT, AND PROPOSED
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On June 30, 2006, this Court heard oral argument on Defendant Google’s motion to
dismiss Plaintiff KinderStart.com LLC’s First Amended Complaint (the “FAC”) filed on April
12, 2006, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) (the “12(b) Motion”).
The Court continued Defendant’s Special Motion under California Code of Civil Procedure
(CCP § 425.16). At the hearing, the Court tentatively calendared September 29, 2006 for any
new motions regarding Plaintiffs’ proposed second amended complaint (the “Proposed SAC”).
The parties were asked to confirm that date with the Court’s clerk. In the Court’s Order of July
13, 2006 (the “July 13 Order”), the 12(b) Motion was granted, with leave to amend. The order
specifically allowed Plaintiffs the opportunity amend Counts Two through Nine of the FAC, and
did not specify a date by which to file the Proposed SAC. Further, during the June 30, 2006
Gregory J. Yu (State Bar No. 133955)
GLOBAL LAW GROUP
2015 Pioneer Court, Suite P-1
San Mateo, CA 94403
Telephone: (650) 570-4140
Facsimile: (650) 570-4142
E-mail: glgroup [at] inreach [dot] com
Attorney for Plaintiffs and Proposed Class and Subclasses
Case 5:06-cv-02057-JF Document 43 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 1 of 4
Kinderstart.Com, LLC v. Google, Inc.
Doc. 43
Dockets.Justia.com
PLAINTIFF