Luque et al v. AT&T Corp. et al

Filing 79

ORDER to enlarge page limitation for opposition & reply briefs re 77 Stipulation filed by AT&T Communications of California, Inc., AT&T Corp., Pacific Bell Telephone Company. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 8/19/2010. (be, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/20/2010)

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

(Counsel listed on following pages)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOE LEWIS LUQUE AND HERMAN RICHARDSON, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated Plaintiffs, vs. AT&T CORP., PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE CO. d/b/a AT&T CALIFORNIA, AND AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF CALIFORNIA, INC., Defendants.

No. C-09-5885-CRB (JCS) STIPULATION TO ENLARGE PAGE LIMITATION FOR OPPOSITION AND REPLY BRIEFS ON MOTION FOR CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATION

LEGAL_US_W # 63884706.1

STIPULATION TO ENLARGE PAGE LIMITATION U.S.D.C., N.D. Cal., No. C-09-5885-CRB (JCS)

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

Counsel for Plaintiff Joe Lewis Luque and Herman Richardson: THOMAS MARC LITTON (Cal. State Bar No. 119985) SANFORD WITTELS & HEISLER, LLP 555 Montgomery Street, Suite 820 San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: [phone] [e-mail] STEVEN L. WITTELS (N.Y. State Bar No. 2004635) DAVID W. SANFORD (N.Y. State Bar No. 457933) ANDREW MELZER (N.Y. State Bar No. 4270682) STANFORD WITTELS & HEISLER, LLP 1350 Avenue of the Americas, 31st Floor New York, New York 10022 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] MICHAEL RAM (Cal. State Bar No. 104805) KARL OLSON (Cal. State Bar No. 104760) RAM & OLSON LLP 555 Montgomery Street, Suite 820 San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] EDMOND CLARK (Conn. State Bar No. 418915) LAW OFFICE OF EDMOND CLARK 83 Scotland Avenue Madison, Connecticut 06443 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail]

LEGAL_US_W # 63884706.1

STIPULATION TO ENLARGE PAGE LIMITATION U.S.D.C., N.D. Cal., No. C-09-5885-CRB (JCS)

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

Counsel for Defendants AT&T Corp., Pacific Bell Telephone Company, and AT&T Communications of California, Inc.: J. AL LATHAM, JR. (Cal. State Bar No. 071605) PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP 515 South Flower Street, 25th Floor Los Angeles, California 90071 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] JEFFREY D. WOHL (Cal. State Bar No. 096838) JEFFREY P. MICHALOWSKI (Cal. State Bar No. 248073) PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP 55 Second Street, 24th Floor San Francisco, California 94105-3441 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] WILLIAM CORY BARKER (Georgia State Bar No. 037727) PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP 600 Peachtree Street, N.E., 24th Floor Atlanta, Georgia 30308 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail]

LEGAL_US_W # 63884706.1

STIPULATION TO ENLARGE PAGE LIMITATION U.S.D.C., N.D. Cal., No. C-09-5885-CRB (JCS)

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

Pursuant to this Court's Local Rule 7-4(b), plaintiffs Joe Lewis Luque and Herman Richardson and defendants AT&T Corp., Pacific Bell Telephone Company, and AT&T Communications of California, Inc., acting through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. Plaintiffs have pending a motion for conditional certification under the Fair Labor

Standards Act which will be heard by the Court on September 24, 2010. Defendants' opposition to the motion is due on August 27, 2010, and plaintiffs' reply is due on September 10, 2010. (See Docket No. 68.) 2. Due to the volume of evidence (including depositions that defendants have taken of

plaintiffs and opt-ins) and related legal arguments that defendants wish to present in opposition to plaintiffs' motion, defendants have requested that they be allowed to file a memorandum in opposition to the motion that is 35 pages long (i.e., ten pages longer than otherwise permitted by this Court's Local Rule 7-4(b). 3. Plaintiffs have agreed to this extension, provided that they be allowed to file a reply brief

that is 25 pages long (i.e., ten pages longer than otherwise permitted by Local Rule 7-4(b)). Defendants have agreed to this extension. 4. Based on the foregoing, the parties believe there is good cause for the Court to enlarge

the page limitations for defendants' opposition memorandum and plaintiffs' reply memorandum as so stipulated. Dated: August 18, 2010. THOMAS MARC LITTON STEVEN L. WITTELS DAVID W. SANFORD ANDREW MELZER SANFORD WITTELS & HEISLER, LLP MICHAEL RAM KARL OLSON RAM & OLSON LLP EDMOND CLARK LAW OFFICE OF EDMOND CLARK By: __/s/ Steven L. Wittels_________________________ Steven L. Wittels Attorneys for Plaintiffs Joe Lewis Luque and Herman Richardson
STIPULATION TO ENLARGE PAGE LIMITATION U.S.D.C., N.D. Cal., No. C-09-5885-CRB (JCS)

LEGAL_US_W # 63884706.1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Dated: August 18, 2010.

J. AL LATHAM, JR. JEFFREY D. WOHL JEFFREY P. MICHALOWSKI WILLIAM CORY BARKER PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP By: ___/s/ William C. Barker_______________________ William Cory Barker Attorneys for Defendants AT&T Corp., Pacific Bell Telephone Company, and AT&T Communications of California, Inc.

UNIT ED

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

Signed: August 19, 2010

S

S DISTRICT TE C TA

ER

N

D IS T IC T R

OF

LEGAL_US_W # 63884706.1

-2-

STIPULATION TO ENLARGE PAGE LIMITATION U.S.D.C., N.D. Cal., No. C-09-5885-CRB (JCS)

A

C

LI

FO

J

arles R udge Ch

. Breyer

R NIA

O OR IT IS S

DERED

RT U O

NO

RT

H