Eshagh v. Terminix International

Filing 9

STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING the parties' request for an extension of time for defendants to file a responsive pleading; case management deadline set for 4/7/2011 for receipt of same; order signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 3/9/2011. (Rooney, M)

Download PDF
H TIM HOFFMAN SBN 49141 HOFFMAN & LAZEAR 2 180 Grand Avenue, Suite 1550 Oakland, CA 94612 3 Telephone: 510-763-5700 1 THOMAS F. CAMPBELL (Pro Hac Vice Pending) D. KEIRON MCGOWIN (Pro Hac Vice Pending) 5 CAMPBELL LAW, P.C. 100 Concourse Parkway, Suite 115 6 Birmingham, AL 35244 Telephone: 205-278-6650 4 7 Attorneys for Plaintiff 8 CHRISTOPHER J. BORDERS SBN 135901 cborders@hinshawlaw.com HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP 10 One California Street, 18th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 11 Telephone: 415-362-6000 9 Attorneys for Defendants THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL 13 COMPANY L.P., a limited partnership; TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 STIPULATION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME CASE NO. 1:11-CV-00222-OWW-DLB 3001346v1 0921184 68345 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION EDWARD ESHAGH, on behalf of himself ) and all others similarly situated ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL ) COMPANY L.P., a limited partnership; ) TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. ) ) Defendants. ) Case No.: 1:11-CV-00222-OWW-DLB STIPULATION AND ORDER TO ENLARGE TIME Hon. Oliver W. Wanger Complaint Filed: 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 IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND STIPULATED by and between the parties to this litigation, by and through their respective counsel, and pursuant to Local Rule 144(a), as follows: 1. Based on the date of service upon Terminix International, Inc., the responsive pleading deadline for Terminix International, Inc. is March 11, 2011. 2. Plaintiff's Complaint is forty-three (43) pages long, contains 201 paragraphs of allegations, and purports to bring five (5) separate claims labeled as follows: Count Count I Count II Count III Count IV Count V 3. Description California UCL (Business and Professions Code §17200, et seq.) California UCL (Business and Professions Code §17500, et seq.) Equitable Relief Breach of Professional Duty Breach of Contract and Duty of Fair Dealing Assumpsit Counsel for the Defendants has been researching the legal issues raised by Plaintiff's claims as well as reviewing and investigating the numerous factual allegations made in the Complaint. Given the number of legal and factual issues raised by Plaintiff's Complaint, that research and factual investigation has not yet been completed. 4. Defendants have requested an enlargement of time of twenty-eight (28) days, thus until April 7, 2011, to file its responsive pleading to the plaintiff's Complaint. Plaintiff has agreed to this request in exchange for Defendants' agreement to (a) appear and respond for both Defendants by April 7, 2011, and (b) to not oppose Plaintiff's counsel's motion for admission pro hac vice of Thomas F. Campbell and D. Keiron McGowin. Defendants agree to the two stipulations requested by Plaintiff. Plaintiff stipulates that he will not object to pro hac vice motions by Defendants' lawyers David Creagh and David Richards. 2 CAPTION CASE NO. 1:11-CV-00222-OWW-DLB 3001346v1 0921184 68345 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 SO STIPULATED. DATED: March 8, 2011 HOFFMAN & LAZEAR : By:/s/ H. Tim Hoffman H. Tim Hoffman Attorneys for Plaintiff DATED: March 8, 2011 HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP : By:/s/ Christopher J. Borders Christopher J. Borders Attorneys for Defendants THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY L.P., a limited partnership; TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 9, 2011 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 DEAC_Signature-END: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 emm0d64h 3 CAPTION CASE NO. 1:11-CV-00222-OWW-DLB 3001346v1 0921184 68345

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?