Falcone v. DLA Piper US LLP Profit Sharing and 401(K) Savings Plan Committee et al

Filing 20

STIPULATION AND ORDER extending time, to and including 4/5/2010, for defendants to file response to amended complaint; Signed by Judge Marilyn Hall Patel on 3/16/2010. (awb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/17/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
A Professional Corporation rd 100 Montgomery Street, 23 Floor San Francisco, California 94104

R. Bradford Huss, SBN 71303 [e-mail] Clarissa A. Kang, SBN 210660 [e-mail] Michelle L. Schuller, SBN 255787 [e-mail] TRUCKER HUSS A Professional Corporation 100 Montgomery Street, 23rd Floor San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Defendants DLA Piper US LLP Profit Sharing and 401(k) Savings Plan Committee, Carol Buss, Lawrence A. Robins and Bank of Oklahoma, N.A. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RICHARD FALCONE, Plaintiff, vs. DLA PIPER US LLP PROFIT SHARING AND 401(K) SAVINGS PLAN COMMITTEE; CAROL BUSS; LAWRENCE A. ROBINS; BANK OF OKLAHOMA, N.A.; and DOES 1-100, Defendant. Case No. C09-05555 MHP STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO THE AMENDED COMPLAINT

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Trucker Huss

Defendants DLA PIPER US LLP PROFIT SHARING AND 401(K) SAVINGS PLAN COMMITTEE, CAROL BUSS, LAWRENCE A. ROBINS and BANK OF OKLAHOMA, N.A. ("Defendants") and Plaintiff RICHARD FALCONE ("Plaintiff") hereby stipulate, by and through their respective counsel, to extend the time by which all Defendants must file a response to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. Pursuant to this stipulation, Defendants shall file their response on or before April 5, 2010. Defendants' request this extension to respond for the following reasons:

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO THE AMENDED COMPLAINT; CASE NO. C 09-0555 MHP
#1067865

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
A Professional Corporation rd 100 Montgomery Street, 23 Floor San Francisco, California 94104

1.

This case was initially assigned to Magistrate Judge Chen. Defendants timely filed

their Declination to Proceed before a Magistrate on February 10, 2010. 2. While reassignment to a district court judge was pending, Defendants timely filed a

Motion to Dismiss in response to Plaintiff's Complaint on February 12, 2010. The case was reassigned to District Court Judge Patel on February 17, 2010, and a Case Management Conference was scheduled for March 29, 2010. The order reassigning the case vacated the hearing date that Defendants had noticed for the Motion to Dismiss and stated that such matters should be renoticed for hearing before Judge Patel. 3. Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on March 5, 2010. Under the Federal Rules,

Defendants must respond to the Amended Complaint by March 19, 2010, which is before the March 29 Case Management Conference. 4. The parties are aware of Item No. 4 of Judge Patel's Standing Order, effective

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Trucker Huss

September 4, 2002, which states that "[m]otions to dismiss shall not be filed before the initial Case Management Conference except by leave of the court." 5. To comply with the Standing Order, preserve Defendants' option to file a Motion to

Dismiss, and avoid the potential expenditure of time and resources involved in the filing and hearing of an ex parte motion for leave to file a motion to dismiss before the March 29 Case Management Conference, the parties hereby stipulate and agree to allow Defendants to file their response to the Amended Complaint by April 5, 2010. The parties have made one previous modification to the case by stipulation, which extended the time to respond to the initial complaint. This extension will not alter any dates or deadlines set by Court order. DATED: March 15, 2010 TRUCKER HUSS

By: /s/Clarissa A. Kang Clarissa A. Kang Attorneys for Defendants DLA Piper US LLP Profit Sharing and 401(k) Savings Plan Committee, Carol Buss, Lawrence A. Robins and Bank of Oklahoma, N.A.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO THE AMENDED COMPLAINT; CASE NO. C 09-0555 MHP
#1067865

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
A Professional Corporation rd 100 Montgomery Street, 23 Floor San Francisco, California 94104

DATED: March 15, 2010

LEWIS, FEINBERG, LEE, RENAKER & JACKSON, P.C. By: /s/Nina Wasow Nina Wasow Attorney for Plaintiff Richard Falcone

I attest that my firm has obtained Ms. Wasow's concurrence in the filing of this document. DATED: March 15, 2010 /s/Clarissa A. Kang Clarissa A. Kang

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

12 3/16/2010

Trucker Huss

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

ER

N

D IS T IC T R

OF

A

C

LI
3

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO THE AMENDED COMPLAINT; CASE NO. C 09-0555 MHP
#1067865

FO

arilyn Judge M

l H. Pate

R NIA

MARILYN HALL PATEL ERED United StatesT IS SO ORD District Court Judge

UNIT ED

13

DATED:

S

S DISTRICT TE C TA

RT U O

I

NO

RT

H