Elvey v. TD Ameritrade, Inc.

Filing 15

Elvey v. TD Ameritrade, Inc.

Doc. 15

Case 3:07-cv-02852-MJJ

Document 15

Filed 07/20/2007

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

MAYER, BROWN, ROWE & MAW LLP LEE H. RUBIN (SBN 141331) SHIRISH GUPTA (SBN 205584) Two Palo Alto Square, Suite 300 Palo Alto, CA 94306 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant TD Ameritrade, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA--SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

MATTHEW ELVEY, an individual, and GADGETWIZ, INC., an Arizona corporation, on their own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. TD AMERITRADE, INC., a New York corporation, and DOES 1 to 100,

Case No. C 07 2852 MJJ STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESETTING MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Judge: Martin J. Jenkins

Defendants.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Matthew Elvey and Gadgetwiz.com filed a First Amended Complaint against Defendant TD Ameritrade, Inc. ("TD AMERITRADE"), on June 28, 2007, and Motion For Preliminary Injunction on July 10, 2007; WHEREAS, TD AMERITRADE field a Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint on July 18, 2007;

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESETTING MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Case No. C 07 2852 MJJ

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 3:07-cv-02852-MJJ

Document 15

Filed 07/20/2007

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

WHEREAS, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-2, the hearing for Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction is currently set for August 14, 2007, and the hearing for TD AMERITRADE's Motion to Dismiss is currently set for August 28, 2007; WHEREAS, on June 29, 2007, the Court ordered a case management conference to be held at 2:00 p.m. on September 18, 2007; WHEREAS, TD AMERITRADE's counsel has a scheduling conflict with the current hearing date of August 14, 2007 for the Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Plaintiffs' counsel has a scheduling conflict with the current hearing date of August 28, 2007 for the Motion to Dismiss; WHEREAS, the Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Preliminary Injunction raise common issues of law such that it will likely be more efficient for the Court to consolidate the hearing dates for the two motions; WHEREAS, it would be efficient for the parties, and may be more efficient for the Court, to align the hearing dates for the pending motions with the current date for the case management conference, September 18, 2007; WHEREAS, the proposed schedule set forth in this stipulation will not postpone any deadline set by the Court and serves judicial economy; IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, that pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction and TD AMERITRADE'S Motion to Dismiss shall both be set for September 18, 2007; IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED that TD AMERITRADE will file its Opposition to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction no later than August 23, 2007, and that Plaintiffs will file their Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss no later than August 27, 2007. The parties shall file their respective reply briefs no later than September 4, 2007. IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED that this stipulation shall not be construed to reflect the position of any of the parties concerning the urgency or absence of any urgency of the relief sought in the Motion for Preliminary Injunction. 1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESETTING MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C 07 2852 MJJ

Case 3:07-cv-02852-MJJ

Document 15

Filed 07/20/2007

Page 3 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

Dated: July 20, 2007 By: /s/ Alan Himmelfarb LAW OFFICES OF ALAN HIMMELFARB Alan Himmelfarb 2757 Leonis Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90058 Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Dated: July 20, 2007

By:

/s/ Lee H. Rubin MAYER, BROWN, ROWE & MAW LLP Lee H. Rubin Attorneys for Defendant TD AMERITRADE

E-Filer's Attestation: Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X (B), Lee H. Rubin hereby attests that the signatory's concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained.

[Proposed] Order Pursuant to Stipulation, and for good cause shown, IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED:______________ ______________________________ Martin J. Jenkins UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESETTING MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C 07 2852 MJJ