Bibo et al v. Federal Express Inc.

Filing 89

STIPULATION AND ORDER extending deadline for filing reply memorandum. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 02/03/09. (rbe, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2009)

Download PDF
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 Daniel L. Feder, Esq., SB # 130867 Peter B. Fredman, Esq., SB #189097 LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL L. FEDER 807 Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94133 Telephone: (415) 391-9476 Facsimile: (415) 391-9432 Email: danfeder@pacbell.net peterfredman@sbcglobal.net Attorneys for Plaintiffs Paul Bibo, Georgia Shields, Alex Galvez, Marc Garvey, Bryan Peter, and all others similarly situated UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PAUL BIBO, an individual, and GEORGIA SHIELDS, an individual, and ALEX GALVEZ, an individual, MARC GARVEY, an individual; BRYAN PETER, an individual, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC., a Delaware Corporation, and DOES 1-500, inclusive, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: C 07-02505 TEH STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDERTO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR FILING REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION FROM FEBRUARY 9, 2009 TO FEBRUARY 16, 2009 Hearing Date: Time: Place: March 2, 2009 10:00 a.m. th Dept. 12, 19 Floor Honorable Thelton E. Henderson Trial Date: None Set RECITALS WHEREAS, this matter is scheduled for hearing on class certification on March 2, 2009; WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed their moving papers on November 14, 2008; WHEREAS, on January 8, 2009, the Court granted Defendant's consent motion to extend the page limit for its opposition memorandum to 35 pages; WHEREAS, Defendant filed its opposition papers on January 12, 2009; STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) OR TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR FILING REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION Case No. : C 07-02505 TEH -1- 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 WHEREAS, Defendant's opposition papers included, in addition to the 35 page extended brief (Docket No. 75), hundreds and hundreds of pages of supporting materials (Dockets Nos. 76 through 86 plus attachments); WHEREAS, Plaintiffs' reply memorandum was due for filing on February 9, 2009; WHEREAS, Plaintiffs seek additional time to review the materials submitted in opposition and prepare their reply brief; THEREFORE, Plaintiffs hereby request, and Defendant stipulates, that Plaintiffs' time to file their reply memorandum and supporting papers be extended to February 16, 2009. STIPULATION IT IS SO STIPULATED DATED: February 2, 2009 LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL L. FEDER By: /S/ Peter Fredman Peter B. Fredman Attorneys for Plaintiffs Paul Bibo, Georgia Shields, Alex Galvez, Marc Garvey, Bryan Peter, and all others similarly situated DATED: February 2, 2009 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION By: /S/ Sandra C. Isom Sandra C. Isom Attorneys for Defendant Federal Express Corporation STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) OR TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR FILING REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION Case No. : C 07-02505 TEH -2- 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 ECF CERTIFICATION: I, Peter Fredman, the filer of this ECF Document, hereby certify that the concurrence to this stipulation has been obtained by ECF registrant: Sandra Colene Isom. /s/ Peter Fredman ORDER IT IS SO ORDERED Plaintiffs' Reply Brief in support of their Motion For Class Certification shall be due February 16, 2009 instead of February 9, 2009. 02/03/09 Dated:_______________ UNIT ED S S DISTRICT ________________________________ TE C TA Hon. Thelton E. Henderson United States District Court Judge ER N F D IS T IC T O R STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) OR TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR FILING REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION Case No. : C 07-02505 TEH -3- A C LI FO He elton E. udge Th J nderson R NIA RT U O NO RT H

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?