Brown v. Charter Communications, Inc.

Filing 11

ORDER GRANTING 10 Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Initial Complaint for an Additional 10 Days, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 8/18/2017. (Hall, S)

1 HELEN B. KIM, CSB 138209
[e-mail]
2
ROWENA SANTOS, CSB 210185
3 [e-mail]
THOMPSON COBURN LLP
4
2029 Century Park East, Suite 1900
5 Los Angeles, California 90067
Tel: [phone] / Fax: [phone]
6
7 Attorneys for Defendant,
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
8
9
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12
13 TERI BROWN, individually and on
behalf of all other similarly situated,
14
Plaintiff,
15
v.
16
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS,
17 INC. d/b/a SPECTRUM, and JOHN
DOES 1-10,
18
Defendants.
19

CASE NO. 1:17-CV-00670-LJO-JLT
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME
TO RESPOND TO INITIAL
COMPLAINT FOR AN ADDITIONAL
10 DAYS; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
(Doc. 10)

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

This Stipulation is entered into by and between the parties, plaintiff, TERI
BROWN (“Plaintiff”), and defendant, CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
d/b/a SPECTRUM (“Defendant”), through their respective undersigned counsel
based upon the following facts:
1.

On July 3, 2017, Plaintiff served her Complaint filed in the United

States District Court for the Eastern District of California, and the deadline by which
Defendant is to respond to the Complaint was July 24, 2017;

28
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL COMPLAINT FOR
AN ADDITIONAL 10 DAYS; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1

2.

On July 13, 2017, the Court approved Plaintiff and Defendant’s

2 (collectively “Parties”) stipulation extending the time for Defendant to answer,
3 move, or otherwise plead to the Complaint, allowing 28 additional days for such
4 filing, making it due on or before August 21, 2017;
5

3.

Defendant continues to investigate the background on this matter.

6 However, this is taking time because it appears the account was disconnected in
7 2013, and it takes additional time to obtain historical account notes and information.
8 This information is necessary to assess Plaintiff’s allegations and possible defenses.
9 Also, it has come to Defendant’s attention in the investigation process that
10 arbitration is potentially at issue. If the dispute should properly be in arbitration, the
11 Parties will need to meet-and-confer and file the appropriate stipulations and/or
12 motions. Based upon the foregoing, Defendant is in need of an additional 10 days
13 extension to investigate the background of this case and to file its responsive
14 pleading to Plaintiff’s Complaint herein;
15

4.

Accordingly, the Parties have agreed, subject to the Court’s approval,

16 that Defendant shall have an additional 10 days up to and including August 31,
17 2017, for the filing of its responsive pleading; and
18

5.

Except as otherwise set forth herein, no other extensions have been

19 requested or ordered.
20

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the Parties, through their

21 respective undersigned counsel that Defendant shall have to and including August
22 31, 2017 in which to answer, move, or otherwise plead to the Complaint herein.
23 ///
24 ///
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
2
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL COMPLAINT FOR
AN ADDITIONAL 10 DAYS; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1 DATED: August 17, 2017
2

THOMPSON COBURN LLP
By:

4

/s/ Rowena Santos
Helen B. Kim
Rowena Santos

5

Attorneys for Defendant,
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

3

6
7

DATED: August 17, 2017

8

LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN,
P.C.
By:

10

/s/ Todd M. Friedman
Todd M. Friedman
Adrian R. Bacon
Meghan E. George

11

Attorneys for Plaintiff

9

12
[PROPOSED] ORDER

13
14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 18, 2017

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL COMPLAINT FOR
AN ADDITIONAL 10 DAYS; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER