Quirk v. Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc. et al

Filing 92

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE RESPONSES TO FIFTH AMENDED COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 12/12/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/12/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

JEFFREY T. MAKOFF (SBN 120004)
HEATHER A. LANDIS (SBN 267615)
MARIO R. NICHOLAS (SBN 273122)
VALLE MAKOFF LLP
2 Embarcadero Center, Suite 2370
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Joe Quirk
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
SONY PICTURES ENTERTAINMENT )
INC., et al.,
)
)
Defendants. )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
JOE QUIRK,

Case No. 3:11-CV-03773 RS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER RE RESPONSES TO FIFTH
AMENDED COMPLAINT
[L.R. 6-1(b)]
Trial Date: March 25, 2013
Complaint Filed:
FAC Filed:
SAC Filed:
TAC Filed:
4AC Filed:
5AC Filed:

August 1, 2011
September 28, 2011
November 28, 2011
February 29, 2012
August 1, 2012
November 30, 2012

25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE RESPONSES TO FIFTH
AMENDED COMPLAINT [L.R. 6-1(b)]; CASE NO. 3:11-CV-03773 RS

1

Pursuant to Northern District of California Local Rule 6-1(b), plaintiff Joe Quirk

2

(“plaintiff”) and defendants Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc. (“Sony”), Columbia Pictures

3

Industries, Inc. (“Columbia”), Pariah, David Koepp, and DGK, Inc. (“DGK”) (collectively,

4

“defendants”), by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby stipulate as follows:

5
6

STIPULATION
1.

On November 30, 2012, plaintiff filed a Fifth Amended Complaint (“5AC”)

7

that added new defendant DGK to all claims for relief in the Fourth Amended Complaint

8

(“4AC”);

9

2.

The 5AC did not amend any substantive allegations against earlier defendants

10

Sony, Columbia, Pariah, and Koepp, all of whom had already answered the 4AC on August

11

18, 2012;

12

3.

Plaintiff and defendants agree that defendants Sony, Columbia, Pariah, and

13

Koepp’s answers to the 4AC should also be construed as answers to plaintiff’s allegations in

14

the 5AC. Therefore, plaintiff and defendants agree that defendants Sony, Columbia, Pariah,

15

and Koepp shall not be required to file separate answers to the 5AC; and

16
17

4.

Plaintiff and defendants further agree that defendant DGK will file a

responsive pleading to the 5AC by December 21, 2012.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

[CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PAGE]

25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33

1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE RESPONSES TO FIFTH
AMENDED COMPLAINT [L.R. 6-1(b)]; CASE NO. 3:11-CV-03773 RS

1
2

5.

This stipulation does not prejudice any party and does not affect any other

matters or deadlines set by the Court.

3
4

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

5
6

Dated: December 12, 2012.

7

VALLE MAKOFF LLP
By: /s/ Heather A. Landis
Heather A. Landis
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Joe Quirk

8
9
10
11
12

Dated: December 12, 2012.

13

CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR, PC
By: /s/ Andrew Esbenshade
Andrew Esbenshade
Attorneys for Defendants
Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc.; Columbia
Pictures Industries, Inc.; Pariah; David Koepp;
and DGK, Inc.

14
15
16
17
18
19

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
21
22

12/12
Dated: ____________, 2012

_________________________________
HONORABLE RICHARD SEEBORG
District Court Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33

2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE RESPONSES TO FIFTH
AMENDED COMPLAINT [L.R. 6-1(b)]; CASE NO. 3:11-CV-03773 RS