Barnes et al v. The Hershey Company

Filing 185

ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 183 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/10/2014)

1
2
3
4

DARYL S. LANDY, State Bar No. 136288
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
One Market, Spear Street Tower
San Francisco, CA 94105-1126
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

MICHAEL J. PUMA (admitted pro hac vice)
CHRISTOPHER D. HAVENER (admitted pro hac vice)
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
1701 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
THE HERSHEY COMPANY

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

16
GREGORY P. BARNES, et al.,

Case No. 12-cv-01334-CRB

17
18
19

Plaintiffs,

STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANT THE HERSHEY
COMPANY’S ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY BRIEF IN
SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN EXCESS OF
FIFTEEN PAGES

vs.
THE HERSHEY COMPANY,

20
21

Defendant.

22
23
24
25
26
27

STIPULATION
WHEREAS Defendant The Hershey Company (“Hershey”) filed its Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment (the “Motion”), Dkt. 150, on August 12, 2014;
WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed their Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to

28
1

STIPULATION AND ORDER
GRANTING LEAVE TO DEFENDANT TO FILE
REPLY IN EXCESS OF FIFTEEN PAGES
CASE NO.: 3:12-CV-01334-CRB (NC)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

the Motion and simultaneously also requested relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d),
Dkt. 176, on September 3, 2014,
WHEREAS counsel for Plaintiffs and counsel for Defendant have conferred, and
Plaintiffs have no objection to allowing Hershey to file a twenty-page reply in support of its
Motion, of which no more than fifteen (15) pages may be dedicated to a reply in support of the
merits of the Motion, including objections on evidence, if any, and no more than five (5) pages
may be dedicated to opposing Plaintiffs’ separate request for relief under Rule 56(d).
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED pursuant to Local Rules 7-11 & 7-12 by and between the
parties hereto, through their respective attorneys of record, that Hershey may exceed the fifteenpage limit set by Local Rule 7-4 and file a twenty-page reply in support of the Motion, on the
terms described above.
Pursuant to L.R. 5-1(i)(3) regarding signatures, I, Christopher D. Havener, attest that
concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories. I
declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing
is true and correct.

16
17

Dated: September 5, 2014

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

18
By: /s/ Christopher D. Havener
Christopher D. Havener

19
20

Attorneys for Defendant
THE HERSHEY COMPANY

21
22

Dated: September 5, 2014

THE BRANDI LAW FIRM

23
24

By: /s/ Brian J. Malloy
Brian J. Malloy

25

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

26
27
28
2

STIPULATION AND ORDER
GRANTING LEAVE TO DEFENDANT TO FILE
REPLY IN EXCESS OF FIFTEEN PAGES
CASE NO.: 3:12-CV-01334-CRB (NC)

1

ORDER

2
3

Pursuant to the parties’ Stipulation, and for good cause showing, the Court shall permit

4

Defendant The Hershey Company to file a twenty (20) page Reply In Support of Its Motion for

5

Partial Summary Judgment, of which no more than fifteen (15) pages may be dedicated to a reply

6

in support of the merits of the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, including objections on

7

evidence, if any, and five (5) pages may be dedicated to opposing Plaintiffs’ separate request for

8

relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d).

9

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

10
11

Dated: September 10, 2014
By:
CHARLES R. BREYER
United States District Judge
Northern District of California

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

STIPULATION AND ORDER
GRANTING LEAVE TO DEFENDANT TO FILE
REPLY IN EXCESS OF FIFTEEN PAGES
CASE NO.: 3:12-CV-01334-CRB (NC)