Hendricks v. AT&T Mobility LLC

Filing 38

STIPULATION and Proposed Order For Extension of Time To File Reply by AT&T Mobility LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration)(Cornehl, Lisa) (Filed on 8/23/2011)

I

MAYER BROWN LLP
JOHN NADOLENCO (SBN

2

brown.com
(sBN 232733)
SAW
lcornehl@mayerbrown. com
350 South Grand Avenue
25th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1503
Telephone : [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

J

4
5

181 128)

6
7

MAYER BROWN LLP
DONALD M. FALK (SBNIs02s6)

8

dfalk@mayerbrown,com
Two Palo Alto Square, Suite 300
3000 El Camino Real
Palo Alto, CA 94306-2112
Telephone: (650) 33 I -2000
Facsimile: (650) 33 1 -2060

9

l0
11

Attorneys for Defendant
T2

AT&T Mobility LLC

t3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIF'ORNIA
15

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

t6
t7

PATRICK HENDRICKS, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated,

18

Plaintift
T9
VS.

20

AT&T MOBILITY,LLC,
2t
Defendant.

Case

No. Cl l-00409 CRB

STTPULATION AND IPROPOSEDI
ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
FOR DEFENDANT AT&T MOBILITY
LLC TO FILE REPLY

Date: September 23,2011
Time: 10:00 a,m.
Courtroom

8

22

Honorable Charles R. Breyer
23

24
25

26
27
28
STIPULATION AND IPROPOSEDI ORDER;
CASE NO. CVl l-00409 CRB

I

WHEREAS, on July 7 ,2011, defendant AT&T Mobility LLC ("ATTM") filed a Motion

2

to Compel Arbitration and to Stay Case, and on August 8, 2011, plaintiff Patrick Hendricks filed

a

an Opposition to that motion;

J

4

WHEREAS, pursuant to this Court's docket entry of July 7, 2011, ATTM's current

5

deadline to file a Reply in support of its motion is August 29,2071, which is 25 days before the

6

scheduled hearing date on September 23,2011;

7
8

9

t0

WHEREAS, as set forth in the accompany Declaration of Kevin Ranlett, and pursuant to
Local Rules 6-1 and 6-2, ATTM requests an additional eleven days to file its Reply;

WHEREAS, an extension to September 9,2011 for ATTM to file its Reply would not
affect the hearing date on ATTM's motion; and

l1

WHEREAS, plaintiff stipulates to this request;

t2

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that ATTM's time to file its Reply in

13

support of its Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Stay Case shall be extended by eleven days to

14

September 9,2071.

15

t6
t7
18

AGREED TO BY:
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.

MAYER BROWN LLP

By: /s/ Scott A. Bursor

By: /s/ John Nadolenco
John Nadolenco (CA Bar No. 181 128)

Scott A. Bursor (CA Bar No. 276006)

t9
20

2t
22
23

24
25

26
27

369 Lexington Avenue, 1Oth Floor
New York, NY 10017
Telephoné: (212) 989 -9113
Facsimile: (212) 989 -91 63
Email : [e-mail]

350 South Grand Avenue, 25th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1503
Telephone: [phone]

L. Timothy Fisher (CA Bar No. 191626)
Sarah N. Westcot (CA Bar No. 264916)
BURSOR & FISHER P.A.
2l2l North California Blvd., Suite 1010
Walnut Creek, CA94596
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: (925) 407 -2700
Email: [e-mail]

Donald M, Falk (CA Bar No. 150256)
MAYER BROWN LLP
Two Palo Alto Square, Suite 300
3000 El Camino Real
Palo Alto, CA 94306-2112
Telephone: (650) 33 l-2000
Facsimile: (650) 33 l-2060
Email : dfalk@mayerbrown. com

Facsimile:

[phone]

Email : jnadolenco@mayerbrown. com

[e-mail]
Attorneys

28

þr

Defendant

AT&T Mobility LLC
1

STTPULATTON AND IPROPOSED] ORDER;
CASE NO. CVI I-OO4O9 CRB

I
2
J

4
5

6

Barry L. Davis Qtro hac vice)
Daniel R. Lever (1tro hac vice)
Aaron P, Davis (pro hac vice)
THORNTON, DAVIS & FEIN, P.A.
80 SW Eighth Street,2gth Floor
Miami, Florida 33130
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

7

Att orneys
8

for

P

I

aintiff

Patrick Hendriclrs

9

l0

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION,IT IS SO ORDERED

1l

t2

Dated: August

_,2011
Honorable Charles

l3

R. Breyer

t4

l5
16

t7

l8
19

20

2I
22
23

24
25

26
27
28
2
STTPULATTON AND [PROPOSED] ORDER;
CASE NO. CVI I-OO4O9 CRB

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

1

2

I am employed in Los Angeles County, California. I am over the age of eighteen years

J

and not aparty to the within-entitled action. My business address is 350 South Grand Avenue,

4

25th Floor, Los Angeles, Califomia 90071-1503. On August 23,2011, the following document

5

was served electronically via the CM/ECF system:

STIPULATTON AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
FOR DEFENDANT AT&T MOBILITY LLC TO FILE REPLY

6
7

I further certify that I mailed the foregoing document in a sealed envelope with postage

8

thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Los Angeles, California addressed as set forth
9

below:
10

l1

t2
13

r4

Aaron P. Davis
Barry L. Davis
Daniel R. Lever
THORNTON DAVIS & FEIN, P.A,
80 SV/ Eighth Street
Miami, FL 33130
Telephone: [phone]

l5

I am readily familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence

16

for mailing. Under that practice the envelopes would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service

I7

on that same day with postage thereon

l8

aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid

t9

or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.

date

at whose

direction the service was made.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above

22
23

if postal cancellation

I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court

20

2t

fully prepaid in the ordinary course of business. I am

is true and correct.
Executed on August 23,2011, at Los Angeles, California'

24
25
26

27
28

I
PROOF OF SERVICE ; CASE NO, CVl l-00409 CRB
700008386