Gross v. Symantec Corporation
Filing
48
ORDER re 47 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER TO CONTINUE THE CMC AND MOTION TO DISMISS HEARING TO AUGUST 3, 2012 filed by Symantec Corporation. Resetting Hearing as to 38 MOTION to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint. Mot ion Hearing reset for 8/3/2012 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. Case Management Conference reset for 8/3/2012 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 7/5/2012. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/6/2012)
Case3:12-cv-00154-CRB Document47 Filed07/02/12 Page1 of 4
1
4
Sean P. Reis (SBN 184004)
sreis@edelson.com
EDELSON MCGUIRE LLP
30021 Tomas Street, Suite 300
Rancho Santa Margarita, California 92688
Telephone: (949) 459-2124
Facsimile: (949) 459-2123
5
Attorneys for Plaintiff James Gross and the Putative Class
6
KEITH E. EGGLETON, State Bar No. 159842
MAURA L. REES, State Bar No. 191698
ANTHONY J WEIBELL, State Bar No. 238850
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
Professional Corporation
650 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
Telephone: (650) 493-9300
Facsimile: (650) 565-5100
E-mail: mrees@wsgr.com; aweibell@wsgr.com
2
3
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Attorneys for Defendant Symantec Corporation
[Additional counsel included in signature block.]
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
15
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
16
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
17
JAMES GROSS,
18
Case No. 3:12-cv-00154-CRB
Plaintiff,
19
v.
20
SYMANTEC CORPORATION,
21
Defendant.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:12-CV-00154-CRB
STIPULATED REQUEST AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE TO
AUGUST 3, 2012 THE CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND
HEARING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Case3:12-cv-00154-CRB Document47 Filed07/02/12 Page2 of 4
1
2
WHEREAS, a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) and a hearing on Symantec’s
motion to dismiss were previously set by the Court for July 6, 2012;
3
WHEREAS, the Court recently issued a notice resetting these events to July 20, 2012;
4
WHEREAS, counsel for Symantec will on that date be engaged in a series of previously-
5
scheduled depositions in another matter taking place on the East Coast, and counsel for Symantec
6
scheduled these depositions during the third and fourth weeks of July in material part to avoid any
7
conflict with the previously-set CMC and hearing in this action;
8
9
WHEREAS, Symantec requested that Plaintiff agree to a two-week continuance of the
CMC and hearing to August 3, 2012, and Plaintiff has so agreed;
10
NOW THEREFORE, the parties, through their counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:
11
The CMC and hearing currently set for July 20, 2012 should be continued to August 3,
12
2012.
13
14
Dated: June 29, 2012
15
16
17
EDELSON MCGUIRE LLP
By:
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
Professional Corporation
/s/ Benjamin Richman
24
Jay Edelson (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
jedelson@edelson.com
Rafey S. Balabanian (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
rbalabanian@edelson.com
Benjamin H. Richman (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
brichman@edelson.com
Chandler R. Givens (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
cgivens@edelson.com
EDELSON MCGUIRE LLC
350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1300
Chicago, Illinois 60654
Telephone: (312) 589-6370
Facsimile: (312) 589-6378
25
Attorneys for Plaintiff
18
19
20
21
22
23
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:12-CV-00154-CRB
2
By: /s/ Maura L. Rees
Maura L. Rees
Attorneys for the Defendant
SYMANTEC CORPORATION
Case3:12-cv-00154-CRB Document47 Filed07/02/12 Page3 of 4
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER
2
3
4
Pursuant to the above stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED THAT the July 20, 2012 Case
Management Conference and hearing on motion to dismiss are hereby reset to August 3, 2012.
5
S
harles
Judge C
NO
10
RT
11
ER
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 3:12-CV-00154-CRB
3
er
R. Brey
A
H
12
E
R NIA
9
O ORD
IT IS S
LI
8
Charles R. Breyer
United States District Judge
RED
FO
Dated: ___________________
July 5, 2012
UNIT
ED
7
RT
U
O
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
___________________________
6
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?