Cardoza v. T-Mobile USA Inc

Filing 22

STIPULATION AND ORDER Initial Case Management Conference set for 3/6/09 is continued to 4/3/2009 10:00 AM.. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 2/19/09. (tdm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/19/2009)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 CHRISTOPHER B. HOCKETT (Bar No. 121539) NEAL A. POTISCHMAN (Bar No. 254862) SANDRA WEST (Bar No. 250389) DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL 1600 El Camino Real Menlo Park, California 94025 Telephone: (650) 752-2000 Facsimile: (650) 752-2111 chris.hockett@dpw.com Attorneys for Defendant T-MOBILE USA, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO WAIVE ARGUMENT ON T-MOBILE'S MOTION TO TRANSFER AND TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE - No. CV08-5120 SC MILTON CARDOZA, on Behalf of Himself and Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. T-MOBILE USA, INC., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: CV08-5120 SC STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO WAIVE ARGUMENT ON T-MOBILE'S MOTION TO TRANSFER AND TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed his complaint in the above-titled action on November 10, 2008; WHEREAS, on January 15, 2009, the Court "so ordered" the parties' stipulation and agreement that T-Mobile's time to answer, move to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12, or otherwise respond to the complaint be extended until the Court has ruled on T-Mobile's motion to transfer this action to the Western District of Washington or, in the alternative, to dismiss or stay the instant action on the same grounds (the "Motion to Transfer") WHEREAS, on January 16, 2009, T-Mobile filed its Motion to Transfer; WHEREAS, on February 9, 2009, Plaintiff filed his opposition to the Motion to Transfer; WHEREAS, T-Mobile will file its reply in further support of the Motion to Transfer by February 20, 2009, at which time the motion will be fully briefed; 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, oral argument on the Motion to Transfer is currently scheduled for March 6, 2009 before this Court; and WHEREAS, an initial case management conference is also scheduled for March 6, 2009; IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED among the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that 1. The parties waive oral argument on the Motion to Transfer and submit the motion on the papers; and 2. The parties request that the initial case management conference currently set for March 6, 2009 be continued to April 3, 2009, as the parties believe that the Motion to Transfer should be decided before the Court and parties address case management issues. Dated: February 18, 2009 DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL By: /s/ Christopher B. Hockett Christopher B. Hockett Attorneys for Defendant T-Mobile Dated: February 18, 2009 LAW OFFICE OF PETER FREDMAN By: /s/ Peter B. Fredman Peter B. Fredman Attorneys for Plaintiff * IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated February 19, 2009 * * UNIT ED S ISTRIC ES D TC AT T STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO WAIVE ARGUMENT ON T-MOBILE'S MOTION TO TRANSFER AND TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE - No. CV08-5120 SC ER N F D IS T IC T O R A C LI FO Judge S amuel C R NIA SAMUEL CONTI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE onti NO IT IS S O ORD ERED RT U O RT H 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 ATTESTATION Pursuant to General Order No. 45, I hereby attest that I have concurrence to file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Waive Argument on T-Mobile's Motion to Transfer and to Continue Initial Case Management Conference from the other signatory whose signature is indicated by a "conformed" signature (/s/) within this e-filed document. /s/ Christopher B. Hockett Christopher B. Hockett STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO WAIVE ARGUMENT ON T-MOBILE'S MOTION TO TRANSFER AND TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE - No. CV08-5120 SC

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?