Andrew et al v. City of Sacramento et al

Filing 15

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 12/21/2017 ORDERING that defendants' deadline to respond to the complaint is 2/19/2018. (Zignago, K.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 RANDALL W. EDWARDS (C.S.B. #179053) redwards@omm.com SUSANNAH K. HOWARD (C.S.B #291326) showard@omm.com O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP Two Embarcadero Center 28ᵗʰ Floor San Francisco, California 94111-3823 Telephone: +1 415 984 8700 Facsimile: +1 415 984 8701 Attorneys for Defendant NATIONWIDE INVESTMENT SERVICES CORPORATION 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 13 CHRIS ANDREW and RICHARD MAYBERRY, suing individually and by and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Case No. 2:17-cv-02266-JAM-KJN STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (SECOND REQUEST) v. CITY OF SACRAMENTO; NATIONWIDE INVESTMENT SERVICES CORPORATION, an Ohio Corporation; INTERNATIONAL CITY/COUNTY MANAGERS ASSOCIATION-RETIREMENT CORPORATION, a District of Columbia Company, Defendants. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIP. TO EXTEND DEFENDANTS TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPL. 2:17-CV-02266-JAM-KJN 1 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 144(a), Plaintiffs Chris Andrew and Richard Mayberry 2 (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants City of Sacramento (the “City”), Nationwide Investment Services 3 Corporation (“Nationwide”), and International City/County Managers Association-Retirement 4 Corporation (“ICMA”) (collectively, “Defendants”) hereby stipulate and agree, subject to Court 5 approval, to extend the time for Defendants to respond to the Complaint by 45 days, such that 6 Defendants new response date would be February 19, 2018. The parties have agreed to enter into 7 settlement discussions, and postponing the deadline for Defendants to respond to the Complaint 8 would allow the parties to focus their efforts on these discussions, rather than on drafting 9 responsive pleadings or motions. This is the second time each Defendant has requested Court 10 approval for an extension of time to respond to the Complaint. Each Defendant previously filed a 11 stipulated request for an extension to respond to the Complaint until January 5, 2018, all of which 12 were subsequently granted by the Court. See Doc. Nos. 9, 12 & 13. These prior stipulations 13 extended Nationwide’s and the City’s time to respond to the Complaint by 45 days (Doc. Nos. 9 14 & 12), and extended ICMA’s time to respond to the Complaint by 16 days (Doc. No. 13). This 15 request would not affect any other court-ordered deadline. 16 17 [signature page follows] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- STIP. TO EXTEND DEFENDANTS TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPL. 2:17-CV-02266-JAM-KJN 1 Dated: December 20, 2017 2 Respectfully submitted, O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 3 4 By: /s/ Randall W. Edwards Randall W. Edwards Attorneys for Defendant NATIONWIDE INVESTMENT SERVICES CORPORATION 5 6 7 Dated: December 20, 2017 8 Respectfully submitted, MASTAGNI HOLSTEDT 9 10 By: /s/ Jeffrey R. A. Edwards (as authorized on December 20, 2017) Jeffrey R. A. Edwards Attorneys for Plaintiffs CHRIS ANDREW and RICHARD MAYBERRY 11 12 13 14 Dated: December 20, 2017 BUCHALTER 15 16 By: /s/ Kevin T. Collins Kevin T. Collins (as authorized on December 20, 2017) Attorneys for Defendant CITY OF SACRAMENTO 17 18 19 20 21 Respectfully submitted, Dated: December 20, 2017 Respectfully submitted, MAYER BROWN, LLP 22 23 24 25 26 By: /s/ Andrew Z. Edelstein Andrew Z. Edelstein (as authorized on December 20, 2017) Attorneys for Defendant INTERNATIONAL CITY/COUNTY MANAGERS ASSOCIATION-RETIREMENT CORPORATION 27 28 -3- STIP. TO EXTEND DEFENDANTS TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPL. 2:17-CV-02266-JAM-KJN 1 2 3 4 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Defendants’ deadline to respond to the Complaint shall be February 19, 2018. DATED: 12/21/2017 /s/ John A. Mendez_____________ Hon. John A. Mendez United States District Court Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -4- STIP. TO EXTEND DEFENDANTS TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPL. 2:17-CV-02266-JAM-KJN

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?