Wixon et al v. Wyndham Resort Development Corp., et al

Filing 245

ORDER by Judge Jeffrey S. White DENYING #242 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. (jswlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/21/2009)

Case 3:07-cv-02361-JSW

Document 244

Filed 04/21/2009

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Jonathan K. Levine (State Bar No. 220289) [e-mail] Elizabeth C. Pritzker (State Bar No. 146267) [e-mail] Todd I. Espinosa (State Bar No. 209591) [e-mail] GIRARD GIBBS LLP 601 California Street, Suite 1400 San Francisco, California 94108 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Individual and Representative Plaintiffs Clarke and Rebecca Wixon and Norman and Barbara Wixon UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Clarke and Rebecca Wixon and Norman and Barbara Wixon, derivatively and on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Wyndham Resort Development Corp. (f/k/a Trendwest Resorts, Inc.), Gene Hensley, David Herrick, John Henley, Peggy Fry and John McConnell, and nominally, WorldMark, The Club, Defendants. Case No. C 07-02361 JSW (BZ) [PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING DIRECTOR DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT FOR MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS AS REPRESENTATIVES AND THE DERIVATIVE ACTION PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 23.1 CLASS AND DERIVATIVE ACTION

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING DIRECTOR DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION CASE NO. C 07-02361 JSW (BZ)

Case 3:07-cv-02361-JSW

Document 244

Filed 04/21/2009

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION Having reviewed the parties' papers and considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the Court hereby DENIES the administrative motion of the Director Defendants for permission to exceed the page limit on their motion to dismiss Plaintiffs as representatives and the derivative action pursuant to Rule 23.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Director Defendants have both failed to demonstrate any basis for departing from the generally applicable page limit set forth in the Court's Civil Standing Order No. 6 and failed to comply with the requirements of Civil Local Rule 7-11(a). This Court is well versed in the facts and procedural history of this case. Accordingly, the Court does not find there is good cause to grant the Director Defendants' request. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 21 ____________________, 2009.

___________________________________ JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING DIRECTOR DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION CASE NO. C 07-02361 JSW (BZ)