Elvey v. TD Ameritrade, Inc.

Filing 34

Elvey v. TD Ameritrade, Inc.

Doc. 34

Case 3:07-cv-02852-MJJ

Document 34

Filed 09/12/2007

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

Alan Himmelfarb LAW OFFICES OF ALAN HIMMELFARB 2757 Leonis Blvd Los Angeles, CA 90058 Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone] [e-mail] Scott A. Kamber Ethan Preston KAMBER & ASSOCIATES, LLC 11 Broadway, 22d Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Counsel for Plaintiffs 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, Defendants. Case No. C 07 2852 MJJ STIPULATED [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Judge: Martin J. Jenkins

GROUNDS 1. Plaintiffs 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 and Class Certification on July 10, 2007. 2. TD Ameritrade filed a Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs' First Amended

Complaint on July 18, 2007. -1STIPULATED [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE CASE NO.: C-07-02852-MJJ
44040231.1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 3:07-cv-02852-MJJ

Document 34

Filed 09/12/2007

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 2007.

3.

On July 20, 2007, the parties filed a stipulated proposed order extending the

briefing schedules and continuing the hearing date for the Motions to September 18, 2007, and the Court approved the stipulated proposed order on July 26, 2007. The parties' respective Motions are presently scheduled to be heard by the Court at 2 p.m. on September 18, 2007. 4. TD Ameritrade filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Opposition to

Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Class Certification on August 22, 2007, asserting that there was a significant development in its internal investigation of possible unauthorized acquisition of customer e-mail addresses from its computer systems, and that this development may significantly affect its arguments in opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction. 5. Plaintiffs opposed TD Ameritrade's Motion for Extension of Time on the grounds

that the Motion did not set forth with particularity the reasons for the extension, as required under Civil L.R. 6-3(a)(1). Plaintiffs filed their opposition to the Motion for Extension of Time on August 23, 2007. 6. The Court denied TD Ameritrade's Motion for Extension of Time on August 23,

7.

The parties recently completed negotiating the stipulated protective order, and the

Court approved and entered the stipulated protective order on September 5, 2007. 8. Pursuant to the protective order, TD Ameritrade has since provided Plaintiffs

further information that clarified the basis for its prior request for an extension described in Paragraph 4. Based on this clarification, the Parties believe that the sharing of further information coupled with an in-person meeting between the parties prior to the hearing on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction regarding the subject matter of the Motion for Preliminary Injunction serves each parties' respective interests, as well as the interests of judicial economy. 9. The earliest date the parties' respective counsel can schedule such a meeting is

September 17, 2007, in the New York area.

-2STIPULATED [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE CASE NO.: C-07-02852-MJJ
44040231.1

Case 3:07-cv-02852-MJJ

Document 34

Filed 09/12/2007

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

10.

Therefore, the parties believe that all interests involved (including the Court's)

would be best served by continuing the hearing date for two weeks. STIPULATION 1. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, that Plaintiffs'

Motion for Preliminary Injunction and TD Ameritrade's Motion to Dismiss shall both be set for October 2, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 11, 19th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Ave., San Francisco, CA 94102. 2. 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. IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD. Date: September 10, 2007 By: /s/ Alan Himmelfarb Alan Himmelfarb Counsel for Plaintiffs Matthew Elvey and Gadgetwiz, Inc. /s/ Lee H. Rubin Lee H. Rubin Mayer Brown LLP Counsel for Defendant TD AMERITRADE, Inc. Filer's Attestation: Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B), Shirish Gupta hereby attests that the signatories' concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained.
ISTRIC ES D TC AT T

Date: September 10, 2007

By:

UNIT ED

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: 9/11/07 By:

RT U O

S

C OF D I S T I C T HEARING DATE STIPULATED [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING R

-3-

ER

N

CASE NO.: C-07-02852-MJJ

44040231.1

A

LI

FO

THE HONORABLE MARTIN J. JENKINS kins UNITED STATES DISTRICTJCOURT JUDGE in J. en ge Mart
NO
Jud

R NIA

OO IT IS S

D RDERE

RT

H