Fleury et al v. Cartier International et al

Filing 319

ORDER re Sur-Reply for 296 Settling Plaintiffs' Motion for Appeal Bond. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 9/12/2008. (emclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/12/2008)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. RICHEMONT NORTH AMERICA, INC., Defendant. ANDRE FLEURY, et al., Plaintiffs, ORDER RE SUR-REPLY FOR SETTLING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR APPEAL BOND (Docket No. 296) No. C-05-4525 EMC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

___________________________________/

Settling Plaintiffs have moved the Court for an order imposing an appeal bond objector Mary Meyer. See Docket No. 296. In their reply brief, Settling Plaintiffs challenge for the first time Ms. Meyer's standing to pursue the appeal. Because this issue was not raised in Settling Plaintiffs' moving papers, the Court shall give Ms. Meyer an opportunity to file a sur-reply, no longer than five pages, to address the limited issue of whether or not she has standing. See, e.g., In re First Capital Holdings Corp. Fin. Prods. Secs. Litig., 33 F.3d 29 (9th Cir. 1994), Livingston v. Toyota Motor Sales USA, Inc., Nos. C-94-1377-MHP, C-94-1359 MHP, C-94-1960 MHP, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24087 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 12, 1997). The sur-reply must be filed by September 17, 2008. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 12, 2008 _________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN United States Magistrate Judge