Yordy v. Plimus, Inc et al

Filing 18

STIPULATION AND ORDER for Extension of Time for Defendants Plimus, Inc. and Great Hill Partners, LLC to Answer or Otherwise Plead. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 02/06/2012. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Nickolas A. Kacprowski (SBN 242684)
[e-mail]
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
555 California Street
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Jeffrey L. Willian, P.C. (pro hac vice pending)
[e-mail]
Jordan M. Heinz (pro hac vice pending)
[e-mail]
Sylvia Nichole Winston (pro hac vice pending)
[e-mail]
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
300 North LaSalle Street
Chicago, Illinois 60654
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants Plimus, Inc.
and Great Hill Partners, LLC

12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

KIMBERLY YORDY, on behalf of herself and all )
others similarly situated,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
PLIMUS, INC., a California corporation and
)
GREAT HILL PARTNERS, LLC, a Massachusetts )
limited liability company,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
)

CASE NO. 12-CV-00229-TEH
STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF
TIME FOR DEFENDANTS PLIMUS,
INC. AND GREAT HILL PARTNERS,
LLC TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE
PLEAD

24
25
26
27
28

WHEREAS, on January 13, 2012, Plaintiff Kimberly Yordy filed a Complaint against
Defendants Plimus, Inc. (“Plimus”) and Great Hill Partners, LLC (“Great Hill).
WHEREAS, Defendant Great Hill was served with the Complaint on January 17, 2012.
WHEREAS, Defendant Plimus was served with the Complaint on January 20, 2012.

STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO
ANSWER OR OTHERWISE PLEAD

12-CV-00229-TEH

1
2

WHEREAS, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(1)(A)(i), Defendant Great
Hill must answer or otherwise plead by February 7, 2012.

3
4

WHEREAS, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(1)(A)(i), Defendant Plimus
must answer or otherwise plead by February 10, 2012.

5

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the parties through their counsel, that

6

pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(a), the time for the Defendants Plimus and Great Hill to answer, move, or

7

otherwise respond to the Complaint (“Response Date”) shall be extended to and including March 2,

8

2012.

9
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
10
11
12

DATED: February 2, 2012

KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP

13
/s/ Nickolas A. Kacprowski
Nickolas A. Kacprowski
Jeffrey L. Willian, P.C. (pro hac vice pending)
Jordan M. Heinz (pro hac vice pending)
Sylvia Nichole Winston (pro hac vice pending)

14
15
16

Attorneys for Defendants Plimus, Inc.
and Great Hill Partners, LLC

17
18
19

DATED: February 2, 2012

EDELSON MCGUIRE, LLP

20
/s/ Sean Patrick Reis
Sean Patrick Reis

21
22

UNIT
ED

S

S

UNIT
ED
RT

H

NO

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

lton E.
dge The

Hender

Ju

RT

28

N

STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO
ANSWER OR OTHERWISE PLEAD

2

A

H

ER

LI

27

son

LI

E. Henderson

NO

ORDERED

Judge Thelton

A

RT
U
O

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

IT IS SO

ER

R NIA

26

DERED

O OR
IT IS S
FO

25

R NIA

24

FO

23

RT
U
O

Attorneys for Plaintiff
ISTRIC
ES D
TC
AT
T 02/06/2012

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

12-CV-00229-TEH