Takano et al v. The Procter & Gamble Company
Filing
23
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/2/19 EXTENDING the Procter & Gamble Company's time to answer the Complaint to 1/16/2019. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
1 REED SMITH LLP
Raymond A. Cardozo (State Bar No. 173263)
2 101 Second Street, Suite 1800
San Francisco, CA 94105-3659
3
Telephone: (415) 543-8700
4 Facsimile: (415) 391-8269
E-Mail: rcardozo@reedsmith.com
5 Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
Counsel for Defendant
6
7
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
L. Timothy Fisher (State Bar No. 191626)
Joel D. Smith (State Bar No. 244902)
Yeremey O. Krivoshey (State Bar No. 295032)
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
E-Mail: ltfisher@bursor.com
jsmith@bursor.com
ykrivoshey@bursor.com
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
Scott A. Bursor (State Bar No. 276006)
888 Seventh Avenue
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 989-9113
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
E-Mail: scott@bursor.com
Counsel for Plaintiffs
8
9
10
11
12
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
TOM TAKANO and TRACY MCCARTHY,
on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated,
Case No. 2:17-cv-00385 TLN-AC
18
v.
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER
EXTENDING THE PROCTER &
GAMBLE COMPANY’S TIME TO
ANSWER THE COMPLAINT
19
THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY,
Judge: Hon. Troy L. Nunley
16
Plaintiffs,
17
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Defendant.
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Tom Takano and Tracy McCarthy (“Plaintiffs”) filed their Class
Action Complaint (“Complaint”) in this action on February 21, 2017.
WHEREAS, the Parties are finalizing their discussions to resolve this action.
WHEREAS, in accordance with Local Rule 144, the Plaintiffs and P&G have agreed to
extend the time for P&G to answer the Complaint up to and including January 16, 2019, which is
14 days from the date that the answer is currently due, January 2, 2019. This is the third
extension of time to respond to the Complaint agreed to by Plaintiffs and P&G. The previous
28
STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANT THE PROCTER & GAMBLE CO.’S TIME TO
ANSWER PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT
1 agreement of an extension extended the date that the answer was due from November 7, 2018 to
2 December 5, 2018, and the second extension was from December 5, 2018 to January 2, 2019.
3
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the Plaintiffs and The
4 Procter & Gamble Co., through their respective counsel, that P&G’s time to answer the
5 Complaint shall be extended up to and including January 16, 2019. Pursuant to Local Rule
6 144(a), approval of this stipulation by the Court is necessary.
7 Dated: December 28, 2018
REED SMITH LLP
8
By: /s/ Raymond A. Cardozo
Raymond A. Cardozo
9
12
Raymond A. Cardozo (State Bar No. 173263)
101 Second Street, Suite 1800
San Francisco, CA 94105-3659
Telephone: (415) 543-8700
Facsimile: (415) 391-8269
E-Mail: rcardozo@reedsmith.com
13
Counsel for Defendant
14 Dated: December 27, 2018
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
15
By: /s/ Yeremey Krivoshey
Yeremey Krivoshey
10
11
16
L. Timothy Fisher (State Bar No. 191626)
Joel D. Smith (State Bar No. 244902)
Yeremey O. Krivoshey (State Bar No. 295032)
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
Email:
ltfisher@bursor.com
jsmith@bursor.com
ykrivoshey@bursor.com
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
Scott A. Bursor (State Bar No. 276006)
888 Seventh Avenue
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 989-9113
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
E-Mail: scott@bursor.com
24
25
26
27
Counsel for Plaintiffs
28
STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANT THE PROCTER & GAMBLE CO.’S TIME TO
ANSWER PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT
DMSLIBRARY01\33632773.v1
1 SO ORDERED.
2
3 Dated: January 2, 2019
4
5
6
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANT THE PROCTER & GAMBLE CO.’S TIME TO
ANSWER PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT
DMSLIBRARY01\33632773.v1
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?