Donohue v. Apple, Inc.
Filing
57
STIPULATION AND ORDER 56 for Extension of Time to File Amended Complaint. Motion Hearing set for 12/21/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 4th Floor, San Jose before Hon. Ronald M. Whyte. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 8/8/12. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/8/2012)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Kathryn S. Diemer, Esq. SBN 133977
DIEMER, WHITMAN & CARDOSI, LLP
75 East Santa Clara Street, Suite 290
San Jose, CA 95113
(408) 971-6270
kdiemer@diemerwhitman.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Alex Stepick (Pro Hac Vice)
Mark Bulgarelli (Pro Hac Vice)
PROGRESSIVE LAW GROUP, LLC
505 N. LaSalle Suite 350
Chicago, IL 60654
312-787-2717
markb@progressivelaw.com
alex@progressivelaw.com
10
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
SAN JOSE DIVISION
14
15
16
DANIEL DONOHUE, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,
CLASS ACTION
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Case No. 5:11-cv-05337 RMW
Plaintiff,
v.
JOINT STIPULATION FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE
AMENDED COMPLAINT; []
ORDER
APPLE INC.,
Defendant.
[N.D. CAL. CIVIL LR 6-2]
Judge: Hon. Ronald M. Whyte
Complaint Filed: November 3, 2011
Trial Date: None
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT; [] ORDER
CASE NO. 5:11-CV-05337-RMW
sf-3175474
1
2
Pursuant to Northern District Local Rules 6-1(b) and 6-2(a), plaintiff and defendant Apple
Inc. (“Apple”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:
3
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2012, the Court entered an order granting Apple’s motion to
4
dismiss, and ordering plaintiff to file a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) on or before June
5
11, 2012;
6
7
WHEREAS, the Court has granted the parties’ stipulated requests to extend plaintiff’s
time to file the SAC (Dkt. Nos. 51, 53);
8
WHEREAS, the SAC is currently due to be filed on August 1, 2012 (Dkt. No. 53);
9
WHEREAS, the parties have met and conferred, and have scheduled a mediation of this
10
dispute on August 24, 2012, with Catherine A. Yanni, Esq. of JAMS;
11
12
WHEREAS, the parties agree that, in light of the scheduled mediation, a further extension
of plaintiff’s time to file the SAC will serve the interest of judicial economy and efficiency;
13
14
WHEREAS, the parties also agree to extend Apple’s time to plead or otherwise respond to
the SAC;
15
16
17
WHEREAS, this stipulation will not otherwise effect or alter any deadline set by this
Court;
WHEREAS, if the mediation is unsuccessful the parties require additional time to resolve
18
issues regarding modifications to the existing protective order and to complete negotiations
19
regarding certain discovery relevant to the filing of a SAC, including discovery designated by
20
Apple as highly confidential.
21
NOW THEREFORE, the parties stipulate as follows:
22
1.
Plaintiff’s time to file the SAC is extended to and including September 21, 2012.
23
2.
Apple’s time to plead or otherwise respond to the SAC is extended to and
24
25
including October 19, 2012.
3.
26
27
Plaintiff’s opposition to any threshold motions responding to the SAC shall be
filed on or before November 16, 2012.
4.
Apple’s reply brief shall be filed on or before December 7, 2012.
28
JOINT STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT; [] ORDER
CASE NO. 5:11-CV-05337-RMW
sf-3175474
1
1
5.
2
3
4
5
A hearing on Apple’s threshold motions, if any, shall be set for December 21,
2012 at 9:00 a.m.
6.
Apple is not obligated to answer the SAC until after the Court rules on any
threshold motions.
Dated: July 26, 2012
6
7
8
PENELOPE A. PREOVOLOS
STUART C. PLUNKETT
SUZANNA P. BRICKMAN
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
By:
9
Attorneys for Defendant
APPLE INC.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
/s/ Penelope A. Preovolos
Penelope A. Preovolos
Dated: July 26, 2012
KATHRYN DIEMER
DIEMER, WHITMER & CARDOSI LLP
KEVIN ENG
EDWARD ZUSMAN
MARKUN ZUSMAN & COMPTON LLP
MARK BULGARELLI
ALEX STEPICK
FRANK JABLONSKI
PROGRESSIVE LAW GROUP, LLC
17
18
By:
19
/s/ Kathryn Diemer
Kathryn Diemer
Attorneys for Plaintiff
DANIEL DONOHUE
20
21
22
23
I, Penelope A. Preovolos, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file
this Stipulation. In compliance with General Order 45, section X.B., I hereby attest that I have on
file the concurrences for any signatures indicated by a “conformed” signature (/s/) within this
efiled document.
24
25
By:
/s/ Penelope A. Preovolos
Penelope A. Preovolos
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT; [] ORDER
CASE NO. 5:11-CV-05337-RMW
sf-3175474
2
1
2
3
4
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: ______________________
______________________________________
Hon. Ronald M. Whyte
United States District Judge
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT; [] ORDER
CASE NO. 5:11-CV-05337-RMW
sf-3175474
3
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
