Yuncker v. Pandora Media, Inc.

Filing 85

ORDER GRANTING (66 in 3:11-md-02264-JSW) STIPULATION MODIFYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PALINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 6/10/10. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/10/2013)

Case3:11-md-02264-JSW Document66 Filed06/07/13 Page1 of 6

1

6

William M. Audet (CA State Bar #117456)
[e-mail]
Jonas P. Mann (CA State Bar #263314)
[e-mail]
Audet & Partners, LLP
221 Main Street, Suite 1460
San Francisco, CA 94105
[phone] Telephone
[phone] Facsimile

7

Interim Class Counsel

2
3
4
5

8
9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12
13

In re Google Inc., Android Consumer Privacy
Litigation

MDL No. 2264

14
15
16

This Document Relates to
ALL CASES

17
18
19
20

TROY YUNCKER, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated,

21
22
23
24

CASE No. 11 2264 JSW

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER MODIFYING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO DISMISS
PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND
AMENDED CONSOLIDATED
COMPLAINT
Case No. 11 3113 JSW

Plaintiff,
v.
PANDORA MEDIA, INC.,
Defendant.

25
26
27
28
MDL No. 2264 M 11 2264 JSW
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT

Case3:11-md-02264-JSW Document66 Filed06/07/13 Page2 of 6

1
2
3
4

WHEREAS, the earliest of the Court’s hearing dates on which all counsel in both cases
are available is October 4, 2013;
WHEREAS, defendants in both actions have noticed their motions to dismiss for hearing
on October 4, 2013;

5

WHEREAS under the current schedule, as reflected in the Court’s Stipulation and Order

6

dated April 22, 2013, the Plaintiffs’ opposition to Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss is due on or

7

before June 20, 2013 and Defendants’ Reply briefs are due on July 8, 2013;

8
9
10
11

WHEREAS the current schedule and that sought by this Stipulation were negotiated to
accommodate various competing obligations of counsel, both professional and personal;
WHEREAS, due to the nature of the issues raised, Plaintiffs would like additional time
to oppose the motions to dismiss;

12

WHEREAS, in light of the parties’ schedules, an agreement has been reached, subject to

13

the Court’s approval, to modify the briefing schedule set out in the April 22, 2013 Stipulation

14

and Order to provide additional time for the parties to brief the motion to dismiss;

15

THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

16

1.

17

The deadlines set forth in the April 22, 2013 Stipulation and Order for Plaintiffs’

Opposition and Google’s Reply shall be vacated and the following deadlines shall apply:

18

a.

Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Google’s Motion to Dismiss The Second

19

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint shall be filed and served on or before

20

July 19, 1013;

21

b.

Google’s Reply to Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Google’s Motion to Dismiss

22

shall be filed and served on or before August 14, 2013; and

23

2.

All corresponding deadlines in Yuncker v Pandora Media, 2011 CV 03113

24

(JSW) are vacated with new dates to be entered that track those set forth above so that the two

25

actions can continue to progress in tandem.

26

3.

If the Court is unable or unwilling to enter the proposed new schedule for the

27

Opposition and Reply briefs set forth above, the parties respectfully request that the Court leave

28

in place the current schedule reflected in the April 22, 2013 Stipulation and Order.
1
MDL No. 2264 M 11 2264 JSW
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING HEARING DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE
FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS … SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT

Case3:11-md-02264-JSW Document66 Filed06/07/13 Page3 of 6

1
2

IT IS SO AGREED:
Dated June 7, 2013

7

AUDET & PARTNERS, LLP
/s/ Jonas P. Mann
William M. Audet
Jonas P. Mann (CA State Bar #263314)
221 Main Street, Suite 1460
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.568.2556
[e-mail]

8

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

3
4
5
6

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

DATE: June 7, 2013

/s/ Michael H. Rubin
David H. Kramer
Michael H. Rubin
Evan M. W. Stern
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
Professional Corporation
650 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

20

Brian M. Willen
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
1301 Avenue of the Americas, 40th Floor
New York, New York 10019
Telephone: [phone]
Email:
[e-mail]

21

Attorneys for Defendant Google Inc.

18
19

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
MDL No. 2264 M 11 2264 JSW
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING HEARING DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE
FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS … SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT

Case3:11-md-02264-JSW Document66 Filed06/07/13 Page4 of 6

1
2

DATE: June 7, 2013

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Attorneys for Troy Yuncker in
Case No. 11 CV 3113 JSW

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

/s/ Joseph J. Siprut
Joseph J. Siprut
[e-mail]
Aleksandra M.S. Vold
[e-mail]
Peter K. Carlson
[e-mail]
SIPRUT PC
17 North State Street
Suite 1600
Chicago, Illinois 60602
312.236.0000
Fax: [phone]

DATE: June 7, 2013
/s/ Tyler G. Newby
Tyler Griffin Newby
Laurence F. Pulgram
Sebastian Elan Kaplan
FENWICK & WEST LLP
555 California Street
Suite 1200
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
Email:
[e-mail]
Email:
[e-mail]

20
21

Attorneys for Pandora Media, Inc. in
Case No. 11 CV 3113 JSW

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
MDL No. 2264 M 11 2264 JSW
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING HEARING DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE
FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS … SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT

Case3:11-md-02264-JSW Document66 Filed06/07/13 Page5 of 6

1
2

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS SO
ORDERED.

3
4

10
Dated: June ____, 2013.

5
6
7

__________________________________________
JEFFREY S. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
MDL No. 2264 M 11 2264 JSW
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING HEARING DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE
FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS … SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT