Terry et al v. Beiersdorf, Inc.

Filing 8

STIPULATION AND ORDER PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-1 REGARDING TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 11/22/11. (klhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/23/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Samuel R. Miller (SBN 66871)
[e-mail]
Ryan M. Sandrock (SBN 251781)
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
555 California Street, 20th Floor
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
T. Robert Scarborough (Pro Hac Vice To Be Submitted)
[e-mail]
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
1 South Dearborn
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

9
10

Attorneys For Defendant
Beiersdorf, Inc.

11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

14
15
16
17
18
19
20

PATRICIA TERRY, MARQUINITA TERRY, )
)
and TAANYKA TERRY,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
BEIERSDORF, INC., a Delaware Corporation )
)
and DOES 1-10, inclusive
)
)
Defendant
)

Case No. 11:05244 JCS
STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER PURSUANT TO
LOCAL RULE 6-1 REGARDING TIME
TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE
RESPOND

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-1 REGARDING TIME TO ANSWER OR
OTHERWISE RESPOND
SF1 1681367v.1

1
2
3
4
5

WHEREAS Plaintiffs served the above-captioned lawsuit on Defendant Beiersdorf, Inc.
(“Beiersdorf” or “Defendant”) on November 3, 2011 (the “Complaint”);
WHEREAS the time for Defendant to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint is
currently November 28, 2011;
WHEREAS Plaintiffs and Defendant have reached an agreement, pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-1,

6

to extend the time within which Defendant must answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint to

7

January 11, 2012.

8
9
10

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and among the
undersigned counsel, on behalf of their respective clients, that Defendant will have until January 11,
2012 to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint.

11
12
13

IT IS SO STIPULATED:
Dated: November 18, 2011

KIRTLAND & PACKARD LLP

14
15
By: /s/ Behram V. Parekh
BEHRAM V. PAREKH

16
17

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
18
19

Dated: November 18, 2011

SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP

20
21
By: /s/ Samuel R. Miller
SAMUEL R. MILLER

22
23

Attorneys for Beiersdorff

24
25
26

Pursuant to General Order 45, Part X-B, the filer attests that concurrence in the filing of this
documents has been obtained from Behram V. Parekh and Samuel R. Miller.

27
2

28

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-1 REGARDING TIME TO ANSWER OR
OTHERWISE RESPOND
SF1 1681367v.1

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Nov. 22
Dated: __________________, 2011

RT

5

FO

NO

R NIA

______________________________________
The Honorable Joseph C. Spero,
o
C. Sper
s
United States Districteph
Judge Jo Judge

4

6

A

H

ER

LI

3

ISTRIC
ES D
TC
AT
T

UNIT
ED

2

S

[PROPOSED] ORDER

RT
U
O

1

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
3

28

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-1 REGARDING TIME TO ANSWER OR
OTHERWISE RESPOND
SF1 1681367v.1