Brooks v. U.S. Bank, N.A.
Filing
45
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 44 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER (REVISED) REGARDING HEARING AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE filed by U.S. Bank, N.A., Set/Reset Deadlines as to 44 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER (REVISED) RE GARDING HEARING AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE, 37 MOTION to Dismiss and/or Strike. Case Management Statement due by 1/30/2014. Case Management Conference set for 2/6/2014 01:30 PM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Rep lies due by 2/27/2014. Motion to Dismiss Hearing set for 3/6/2014 01:30 PM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Motion for preliminary approval hearing set for 2/6/2014 01:30 PM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Motion due: 12/12/13. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 11/26/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/26/2013)
1
[Counsel listed on next page]
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
12
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
CYNTHIA BROOKS, and JACOB SWOYER )
on Behalf of Themselves and All Others
)
Similarly Situated,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
U.S. BANK, N.A.,
)
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
Case No. C12-4935 EMC (JSC)
[Assigned for all purposes to the Honorable
Edward M. Chen]
REVISED STIPULATION REGARDING
HEARING AND CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE DATE; [PROPOSED]
ORDER
Complaint Filed August 21, 2012
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
REVISED STIPULATION REGARDING HEARING AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE
CASE NO. C12-4935 EMC (JSC)
SF:365195.1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Eve H. Cervantez (SBN 164709)
ALTSHULER BERZON LLP
177 Post Street, Suite 300
San Francisco, CA 94108
Tel. (415) 421-7151
Fax (415) 362-8064
Email: ecervantez@altber.com
Harvey Sohnen (SBN 62850)
Patricia Kelly (SBN 99837)
LAW OFFICES OF SOHNEN & KELLY
2 Theatre Square, Suite 230
Orinda, CA 94563
Tel. (925) 258-9300
Fax (925) 258-9315
Email: netlaw@pacbell.net
10
Attorneys for Plaintiff
11
Joan B. Tucker Fife (SBN: 144572)
jfife@winston.com
Emily C. Schuman (SBN: 271915)
eschuman@winston.com
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
101 California Street, Suite 3900
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
415-591-1000
Facsimile:
415-591-1400
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Emilie C. Woodhead (SBN: 240464)
ewoodhead@winston.com
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 3800
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1543
Telephone:
(213) 615-1700
Facsimile:
(213) 615-1750
Attorneys for Defendant
U.S. BANK, N.A.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
REVISED STIPULATION REGARDING HEARING AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE
CASE NO. C12-4935 EMC (JSC)
SF:365195.1
1
2
3
Plaintiffs CYNTHIA BROOKS and JACOB SWOYER (collectively “Plaintiffs”) and
Defendant U.S. BANK, N.A. (“Defendant”) (collectively “Parties”) hereby stipulate as follows:
WHEREAS, on September 23, 2013, the Parties informed the Court that they expected to
4
enter into a written settlement agreement and would submit a motion for preliminary approval of that
5
settlement, and therefore requested that certain case deadlines be continued and/or stayed (Dkt. 40);
6
WHEREAS, on September 24, 2013, the Court approved the Parties’ joint stipulation re-
7
setting Defendant’s deadline to file its reply in support of its Motion to Dismiss and/or Strike to
8
November 21, 2013, with a hearing and case management conference set for December 5, 2013
9
(Dkt. 41);
10
WHEREAS, on November 15, 2013, the Court sua sponte re-set the hearing on Defendant’s
11
Motion to Dismiss and/or Strike and the Parties’ case management conference to December 10, 2013
12
at 1:30 p.m. (Dkt. 42);
13
14
15
WHEREAS, Defendant’s counsel is unavailable on that date and the Parties met and
conferred regarding availability on other dates and times;
WHEREAS, the Parties submitted a stipulation to the Court on November 20, 2013
16
requesting an order to re-set the case management conference, Motion to Dismiss and/or Strike reply
17
and hearing deadlines, and to schedule the preliminary approval hearing to specific dates (Dkt. 43);
18
WHEREAS, the Court’s clerk emailed the Parties on November 22, 2013, notifying the
19
Parties that the Court is not available on the dates proposed by the Parties’ stipulation (Dkt. 43),
20
requesting the Parties to meet and confer and submit a revised stipulation to the Court, and advising
21
that the Court is available on January 23, 2014 and February 6, 2014 for the preliminary approval
22
hearing if Plaintiffs file a motion for preliminary approval on December 12, 2013;
23
24
25
26
WHEREAS, the Parties met and conferred and determined that both Parties are available for
both a case management conference and preliminary approval hearing on February 6, 2014;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate to and request an Order setting forth the
following:
27
28
3
REVISED STIPULATION REGARDING HEARING AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE
CASE NO. C12-4935 EMC (JSC)
SF:365195.1
1
1. The Parties’ case management conference is re-scheduled to February 6, 2014 at 1:30
2
p.m.;
3
2. Plaintiffs will file a Motion for Preliminary Approval of the proposed settlement no later
4
than December 12, 2013;
5
3. Defendant will not oppose Preliminary Approval of the proposed settlement;
6
4. The Court will hear Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Approval of the proposed
7
settlement on February 6, 2013 at 1:30 p.m.;
8
5. The deadline for Defendant to file its reply brief in support of its Motion to Dismiss
9
and/or Strike is postponed until February 27, 2014, with the understanding that this
10
deadline shall be indefinitely continued if the Court grants Plaintiffs’ Motion for
11
Preliminary Approval; and
12
6. The hearing on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and/or Strike is re-scheduled to March 6,
13
2014 at 1:30 p.m. or another day and time agreeable to the Court, with the understanding
14
that this hearing shall be indefinitely continued if the Court grants Plaintiffs’ Motion for
15
Preliminary Approval.
16
///
17
///
18
///
19
///
20
///
21
///
22
///
23
///
24
///
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
4
REVISED STIPULATION REGARDING HEARING AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE
CASE NO. C12-4935 EMC (JSC)
SF:365195.1
1
Dated: November 22, 2013
Dated: November 22, 2013
2
By: /s/ Eve H. Cervantez___________
Eve H. Cervantez
By: /s/ Joan B. Tucker Fife________
Joan B. Tucker Fife
3
4
5
6
Pursuant to N.D. Cal. L.R. 5-1(i)(3), the filer
attests that concurrence in the filing of this
document has been obtained from the above
signatory.
Harvey Sohnen (SBN 62850)
Patricia Kelly (SBN 99837)
LAW OFFICES OF SOHNEN & KELLY
2 Theatre Square, Suite 230
Orinda, CA 94563
Tel. (925) 258-9300
Fax (925) 258-9315
Email: netlaw@pacbell.net
Joan B. Tucker Fife (SBN 144572)
jfife@winston.com
Emily C. Schuman (SBN: 271915)
eschuman@winston.com
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
101 California Street, Suite 3900
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel. (415) 591-1000
Fax (415) 591-1400
Emilie C. Woodhead (SBN 240464)
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 3800
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1543
Tel. (213) 615-1700
Fax (213) 615-1750
Email: ewoodhead@winston.com
15
Eve H. Cervantez (SBN 164709)
Danielle Leonard (SBN 218201)
Laura S. Trice (SBN 284837)
ALTSHULER BERZON LLP
177 Post Street, Suite 300
San Francisco, CA 94108
Tel. (415) 421-7151
Fax (415) 362-8064
Email: ecervantez@altber.com
16
Attorneys for Plaintiff
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Attorneys for Defendant U.S. Bank, N.A
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
REVISED STIPULATION REGARDING HEARING AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE
CASE NO. C12-4935 EMC (JSC)
SF:365195.1
1
ORDER
2
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, AND FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, IT IS SO
3
ORDERED.
4
26
Dated: November___, 2013
UNIT
ED
United States District Judge
RT
10
dwar
Judge E
ER
12
A
H
11
en
d M. Ch
NO
9
R NIA
8
_________________________
TED
EDWARD M. CHEN
GRAN
LI
7
FO
6
RT
U
O
S
5
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
REVISED STIPULATION REGARDING HEARING AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE
CASE NO. C12-4935 EMC (JSC)
SF:365195.1
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?