AT&T Mobility LLC v. Bernardi et al

Filing 90

ORDER re 89 Stipulated Motion to Continue Case Management Conference filed by AT&T Mobility LLC, Motions terminated: 89 Consent MOTION to Continue Stipulated Motion to Continue Case Management Conference filed by AT&T Mobility LLC. Case Management Conference reset for 1/13/2012 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 11/28/2011. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/28/2011)

Case3:11-cv-03992-CRB Document89

1
2
3
4
5

Filed11/23/11 Page1 of 4

DONALD M. FALK (SBN 150256)
[e-mail]
JOHN M. NEUKOM (SBN 275887)
[e-mail]
MAYER BROWN LLP
Two Palo Alto Square, Suite 300
3000 El Camino Real
Palo Alto, CA 94306-2112
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

6
Attorneys for Plaintiff AT&T Mobility LLC
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
12

AT&T MOBILITY LLC,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16

Case No. 3:11-cv-03992-CRB
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

v.
LESLIE BERNARDI and LAURA BARRETT,
Defendants.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:11-CV-03992-CRB

Case3:11-cv-03992-CRB Document89

1
2

Filed11/23/11 Page2 of 4

WHEREAS, on August 12, 2011, Plaintiff AT&T Mobility LLC (“ATTM”) commenced
this action by filing the Complaint (Dkt. No. 1);

3

WHEREAS, on September 6, 2011, the Court entered an order scheduling a case

4

management conference on December 2, 2011 and directing the parties to submit a joint case

5

management statement at least seven days beforehand (Dkt. No. 8);

6
7

WHEREAS, on September 8, 2011, the Court related this action to Schroeder v. AT&T
Mobility LLC, No. 3:11-cv-04412-CRB (N.D. Cal.) (Dkt. No. 15);

8

WHEREAS, on September 13, 2011, the Court entered an order in Schroeder scheduling

9

a case management conference for the same time on December 2, 2011 as the conference in

10

Bernardi (Schroeder, Dkt. No. 10);

11

WHEREAS, on October 26, 2011, the Court granted ATTM’s motion for a preliminary

12

injunction and denied the Bernardi defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and the Schroeder

13

plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction and petition to compel arbitration (Bernardi, Dkt.

14

No. 86; Schroeder, Dkt. No. 29);

15
16

WHEREAS, on November 9, 2011, the Bernardi defendants filed their Answer, which
asserted two counterclaims against ATTM (Bernardi, Dkt. No. 87);

17

WHEREAS, ATTM’s response to the counterclaims is due on December 5, 2011, and

18

ATTM intends to notice any motion responding to those counterclaims for a hearing on January

19

13, 2012;

20

WHEREAS, the parties stipulate that it would be more efficient to combine the case

21

management conferences in Bernardi and Schroeder with the hearing on any motion responding

22

to the counterclaims in Bernardi;

23

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between ATTM and the defendants in

24

Bernardi and the plaintiffs in Schroeder that, with the Court’s permission, the case management

25

conferences in Bernardi and Schroeder shall be continued until January 13, 2012 and combined

26

with the hearing on any motion responding to the counterclaims in Bernardi.

27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:11-CV-03992-CRB

Case3:11-cv-03992-CRB Document89

1

Filed11/23/11 Page3 of 4

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

2

November 23, 2011

3

BURSOR & FISHER P.A.

MAYER BROWN LLP

4

By: /s/ Scott A. Bursor
Scott A. Bursor (SBN 276006)

By: /s/ Kevin Ranlett
Kevin Ranlett (pro hac vice)

369 Lexington Avenue, 10th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]

Donald M. Falk (SBN 150256)
John M. Neukom (SBN 275887)
Two Palo Alto Square, Suite 300
3000 El Camino Real
Palo Alto, California 94306-2112
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]

L. Timothy Fisher
Sarah N. Westcot
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
2121 North California Blvd., Suite 1010
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
[e-mail]

Andrew J. Pincus (pro hac vice)
Evan M. Tager (pro hac vice)
Archis A. Parasharami (pro hac vice)
Kevin Ranlett (pro hac vice)
MAYER BROWN LLP
1999 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Attorneys for Defendants Leslie Bernardi and
Laura Barrett in No. 3:11-cv-03992-CRB and
for Plaintiffs Deborah Schroeder and Astrid
Mendoza in No. 3:11-cv-04412-CRB

Attorneys for Plaintiff AT&T Mobility LLC in
No. 3:11-cv-03992-CRB and Defendant AT&T
Mobility LLC in No. 3:11-cv-04412-CRB

21
22
23

Filer’s Attestation: Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B), Kevin Ranlett
hereby attests that the signatories’ concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained.

24
25
26
27
28
-2STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:11-CV-03992-CRB

Case3:11-cv-03992-CRB Document89

Filed11/23/11 Page4 of 4

1

[PROPOSED] ORDER

2

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

S

6

NO

RT

ER

9

A

H

8

LI

7

yer

s R. Bre

harle
Judge C

R NIA

D

RDERE

O
Honorable O
IT IS S Charles R. Breyer

FO

5

Dated: ______________ __, 2011
November
28

UNIT
ED

4

RT
U
O

3

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:11-CV-03992-CRB