Field v. American Mortgage Express Corporation et al
Filing
107
STIPULATION AND ORDER Regarding Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiffs' Motion to Substitute Class Representatives. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 10/19/2011. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/19/2011)
1 Lorraine P. Ocheltree (SBN 151791)
Allegra A. Jones (SBN 236518)
2 DUANE MORRIS LLP
Spear Tower
3 One Market Plaza, Suite 2200
San Francisco, CA 94105-1127
4 Telephone: 415.957.3000
Facsimile: 415.957.3001
5 E-Mail: lpocheltree@duanemorris.com
aajones@duanemorris.com
6
Eric P. Berezin
7 (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
DUANE MORRIS LLP
8 Atlantic Center Plaza
1180 West Peachtree Street NW, Suite 700
9 Atlanta, GA 30309-3448
Telephone: 404.253.6900
10 Facsimile: 404.253.6901
E-mail:
epberezin@duanemorris.com
11
Attorneys for Defendant
12 GEVITY HR, INC.
13
Harry G. Lewis (SBN 157705)
Gordon W. Renneisen (SBN 129794)
Julie A. Marquis (SBN 178466)
CORNERSTONE LAW GROUP
595 Market Street, Suite 2360
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: 415.974.1900
Facsimile: 415.974.6433
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
MARSHALL FIELD, CHERIE
JOHNSON, MARIA IGNACIO
and all other similarly situated persons
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
16 MARSHALL FIELD, individually and on behalf of
all other similarly situated persons,
17
Plaintiffs,
18
v.
19
AMERICAN MORTGAGE EXPRESS CORP., a
20 Pennsylvania Corporation and GEVITY HR, INC., a
Florida Corporation,
21
Defendants.
22
Case No.: 3:09-cv-05972-EMC
JOINT STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING
EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND
TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO
SUBSTITUTE CLASS
REPRESENTATIVES
Date:
November 21, 2011
Time:
3:30 p.m.
Courtroom: 5, 17th Floor
23
24
Purported plaintiffs and class representatives Cherie Johnson and Maria Ignacio (collectively,
25 “Plaintiffs”), by and through their undersigned counsel, and defendant Gevity HR, Inc. (“Defendant”
26 or “Gevity”), by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby enter into the following Joint
27 Stipulation:
28
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Motion and Motion To Substitute Class
DM2\3052866.1
CASE NO. 3:09-CV-05972-EMC
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
1 Representative (“Motion”) on November 4, 2011;
2
WHEREAS, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3(a), the deadline for Gevity to file an opposition
3 to Plaintiffs’ Motion is October 18, 2011;
4
WHEREAS, Plaintiff has agreed to extend the deadline for Gevity to file an opposition to
5 Plaintiffs’ Motion to, and including, October 31, 2011 in light of the circumstances described in the
6 Declaration of Lorraine P. Ocheltree concurrently filed herewith;
7
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, pursuant to Civil
8 L.R. 6-2, by Plaintiffs and Gevity that Gevity will have up to, and including, October 31, 2011, to
9 file an opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3(c), Plaintiffs’ deadline to
10 file and serve a reply to Gevity’s opposition to the Motion shall be November 7, 2011.
11
12 Dated: October 18, 2011
DUANE MORRIS LLP
13
By: /s/ Allegra A. Jones
Lorraine P. Ocheltree
Allegra A. Jones
Attorneys for Defendant
GEVITY HR, INC.
14
15
16
17
18 Dated: October 18, 2011
CORNERSTONE LAW GROUP
19
By: /s/ Harry G. Lewis
Harry G. Lewis
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
MARSHALL FIELD, CHERIE
JOHNSON, MARIA IGNACIO
and all other similarly situated persons
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DM2\3052866.1
2
CASE NO. 3:09-CV-05972-EMC
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
ORDER
1
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
S
_________________________________
Honorable Judge Edward M. Chen
Judge of the United States District Court
7
10
A
H
ER
LI
dwar
Judge E
RT
9
en
d M. Ch
NO
8
R NIA
6
UNIT
ED
19
5 Dated: October ____, 2011
RT
U
O
4
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
FO
2
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DM2\3052866.1
3
CASE NO. 3:09-CV-05972-EMC
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
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?