Bronson et al v. Johnson & Johnson Inc. et al

Filing 48

ORDER granting 46 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER -Joint- Extending Time to Respond to Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint and Related Briefing Deadlines; Declaration of Michael J. Stortz in Support filed by Johnson & Johnson Inc., McNeil Nutritionals, LLC. Set Deadlines: Motions due by 5/31/2013. Responses due by 6/28/2013. Replies due by 7/12/2013. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 5/9/2013. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/13/2013)

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

MICHAEL J. STORTZ (SBN #139386)
[e-mail]
MATTHEW J. ADLER (SBN #273147)
[e-mail]
DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP
50 Fremont Street, 20th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2235
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
STEVEN A. ZALESIN
[e-mail]
TRAVIS J. TU
[e-mail]
JONAH M. KNOBLER
[e-mail]
PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER LLP
1133 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10036
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
JOHNSON & JOHNSON and
MCNEIL NUTRITIONALS, LLC

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15
16
17
18

BARBARA BRONSON, MICHAEL
FISHMAN, and ALVIN KUPPERMAN,
on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,

19
20
21
22

v.

Case No. 3:12-CV-04184-CRB
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER
EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT AND RELATED BRIEFING
DEADLINES; DECLARATION OF
MICHAEL J. STORTZ IN SUPPORT

JOHNSON & JOHNSON INC. and
MCNEIL NUTRITIONALS, LLC,
Defendants.

23
24
25
26
27
28
D RINKER B IDDLE &
R EATH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
EXTENDING TIME; DEC OF MICHAEL J. STORTZ

-1-

CASE NO. 3:12-CV-04184-CRB

WHEREAS Plaintiffs Barbara Bronson, Michael Fishman, and Alvin Kupperman
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

(“Plaintiffs”) filed the Complaint in this action on August 9, 2012 and thereafter served the
Complaint on Defendants Johnson & Johnson and McNeil Nutritionals, LLC (“Defendants”);
WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint on September 6, 2012;
WHEREAS Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss on October 30, 2012;
WHEREAS Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss came on for hearing before the Court on
April 12, 2013;
WHEREAS the Court granted in part and denied in part Defendants’ Motion by Order
filed April 16, 2013;
WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint on April 26, 2013;
WHEREAS Defendants are presently reviewing Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint
and require additional time to determine their response to that pleading; and
WHEREAS the parties through counsel have met and conferred and reached agreement as
to the briefing schedule for Defendants’ potential Motion to Dismiss, as set forth below, in the
event Defendants choose to so move;
IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED, by the parties through their respective counsel, as
follows:
1.

The deadline for Defendants’ pleading in response to the Plaintiffs’ Second

Amended Complaint is continued to and including May 31, 2013.
2.

In the event that Defendants file a Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended

Complaint, Defendants shall file the Motion and all papers in support of said Motion on or before
May 31, 2013, and briefing and hearing on the Motion to Dismiss shall proceed on the following
schedule:
a.

Plaintiffs shall file their Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss,

including all papers in support of said Opposition, on or before June 28, 2013.
b.

Defendants shall file their Reply in support of their Motion to Dismiss,

including all papers in support of said Reply, on or before July 12, 2013.

27
28
D RINKER B IDDLE &
R EATH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
EXTENDING TIME; DEC OF MICHAEL J. STORTZ

-2-

CASE NO. 3:12-CV-04184-CRB

1
2
3

c.

Hearing on the Motion to Dismiss shall be determined on filing of

Defendants’ Motion.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.

4
5

DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP

Dated: May 3, 2013

6
By:/s/ Michael J. Stortz
Michael J. Stortz

7
8

Attorneys for Defendants
JOHNSON & JOHNSON and
MCNEIL NUTRITIONALS, LLC

9
10
11

Dated: May 3, 2013

THE MILLS LAW FIRM

12
By:/s/ Joshua D. Boxer
Joshua D. Boxer

13
14

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
BARBARA BRONSON, MICHAEL
FISHMAN, and ALVIN KUPPERMAN

15
16

Attestation Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5.1(i)

17
18

Dated: May 3, 2013

23

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

UNIT
ED

25

D
RDERE
IS SO O
IT
The Honorable Charles R. Breyer
ye
JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES r
s R. Bre

Dated: May 9, 2013

27

NO

28

SAN FRANCISCO

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
EXTENDING TIME; DEC OF MICHAEL J. STORTZ

-3-

arle

h
Judge C

ER

CASE NO. 3:12-CV-04184-CRB

H

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

RT

D RINKER B IDDLE &
R EATH LLP

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

S

24

/s/ Michael J. Stortz
Michael J. Stortz

R NIA

22

FO

21

I declare under penalty of perjury under the law of the United States of America that the
foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May 3, 2013 at San Francisco, California.

LI

20

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5.1(i), I, Michael J. Stortz, hereby attest that I have obtained
concurrence in the filing of this document from the other signatory to this document.

A

19

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C