Lingle v. Comcast Corporation

Filing 9

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 03/29/17 ORDERING that the deadline for Comcast to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint is EXTENDED to 04/10/17. (Benson, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

MICHAEL J. STORTZ (SBN 139386)
[e-mail]
MATTHEW J. ADLER (SBN 273147)
[e-mail]
DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP
50 Fremont Street, 20th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2235
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
MICHAEL W. MCTIGUE JR.*
[e-mail]
MEREDITH C. SLAWE*
[e-mail]
DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP
One Logan Square, Suite 2000
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
COMCAST CORPORATION
* pro hac vice to be sought

14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17

JEFF LINGLE,

Case No. 2:17-CV-00425-JAM-CKD
Plaintiff,

18
19

v.

20

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND
DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANT
COMCAST CORPORATION TO
RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

COMCAST CORPORATION,

21

Defendant.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
D RINKER B IDDLE &
R EATH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
EXTEND DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

CASE NO. 2:17-CV-00425-JAM-CKD

1

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Jeff Lingle (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint against Defendant

2

Comcast Corporation (“Comcast”) on January 24, 2017 in the Superior Court of California,

3

Placer County, and served the Complaint on Comcast on January 26, 2017;

4
5
6
7

WHEREAS, on February 27, 2017, Comcast filed a Notice of Removal (Dkt. No. 1) in
this Court;
WHEREAS, the initial deadline for Comcast to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s
Complaint was March 6, 2017;

8

WHEREAS, on February 28, 2017, the parties filed a Stipulation (Dkt. No. 4) to extend

9

the deadline to April 3, 2017 for Comcast to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s

10
11
12

Complaint;
WHEREAS, Comcast has acted with diligence in reviewing the Complaint and
investigating Plaintiff’s allegations;

13

WHEREAS, since February 28, 2017, the parties through counsel have met and conferred

14

regarding Comcast’s position that Plaintiff agreed to arbitrate his claims in this case, and

15

regarding a potential resolution;

16
17
18
19
20
21

WHEREAS, as of March 28, 2017, the parties have not been able to resolve this matter,
nor have the parties reached agreement as to the appropriate forum to adjudicate this dispute;
WHEREAS, Comcast anticipates filing a motion to compel arbitration in response to the
Complaint, but requires additional time to prepare this motion;
WHEREAS, the parties through counsel have met and conferred and agreed that Comcast
shall have an additional week to respond to the Complaint, i.e., until April 10, 2017.

22

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties through their respective

23

counsel that the deadline for Comcast to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint is hereby

24

extended to and including April 10, 2017.

25

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

26
27
28
D RINKER B IDDLE &
R EATH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
EXTEND DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

-2-

CASE NO. 2:17-CV-00425-JAM-CKD

1
Dated: March 29, 2017

DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP

2
3
By: /s/ Matthew J. Adler
Michael J. Stortz
Matthew J. Adler

4
5

Attorneys for Defendant
COMCAST CORPORATION

6
7
8

Dated: March 29, 2017

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

9
By: /s/ Adrian R. Bacon (authorized 3.29.17)
Todd M. Friedman
Adrian R. Bacon

10
11

Attorneys for Plaintiff
JEFF LINGLE

12
13
14

Pursuant to the Stipulation of the parties, IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16

Dated: 3/29/2017
/s/ John A. Mendez________________________
Hon. John A. Mendez
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
D RINKER B IDDLE &
R EATH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
EXTEND DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

-3-

CASE NO. 2:17-CV-00425-JAM-CKD