Architectural Resources Group, Inc. et al v. HKS, Inc.

Filing 35

ORDER and Stipulation for Third-Party Defendants George Loisos's, Susan Ubbelohde's, and Tipping Mar + Associates's Responses to HKS, Inc.'s Third-Party Complaint. Signed by Judge Susan Illston on 1/22/13. (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/23/2013)

1 DAVID A. ERICKSEN (State Bar No. 153923)
[e-mail]
2 SEVERSON & WERSON
A Professional Corporation
3 One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600
San Francisco, California 94111
4 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
5
PETER C. LYON (State Bar No. 174019)
6 [e-mail]
SEVERSON & WERSON
7 A Professional Corporation
1801 N. California Blvd., Suite 101
8 Walnut Creek, California 94596
Telephone: [phone]
9 Facsimile: [phone]
10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA — SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

13
14 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP,
INC., a California corporation; and IDEAS
15 CONSULTING, INC., a California
corporation,
16
Plaintiffs,
17
vs.
18
HKS, INC., a Texas corporation,
19
Defendant.
20

Case No. C-12-5787 SI
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER FOR THIRD-PARTY
DEFENDANTS GEORGE LOISOS’S,
SUSAN UBBELOHDE’S, AND TIPPING
MAR + ASSOCIATES’S RESPONSES TO
HKS, INC.’S THIRD-PARTY
COMPLAINT

21 GEORGE LOISOS dba LOISOS _
UBBELOHDE ASSOCIATES, an Individual,
22 SUSAN UBBELOHDE dba LOISOS +
UBBELOHDE ASSOCIATES, an individual,
23 and TIPPING MAR + ASSOCIATES, a
California corporation,
24
Third Party Defendants.
25
26
27
28

07465.0294/2529748.1

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR THIRD PARTY DEFENDANTS
LOISOS AND TIPPING’S RESPONSE TO HKS’ THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT
Case No. C-12-5787 SI

1

Third-Party Defendants George Loisos and Susan Ubbelohde, dba Loisos + Ubbelohde

2 Associates (collectively, “Loisos”), and Tipping + Mar Associates (“Tipping”) and Third-Party
3 Plaintiff, HKS, Inc. (“HKS”) hereby stipulate as follows:
4

Whereas, the law firm of Severson & Werson will be representing Loisos and Tipping in

5 this matter;
6

Whereas, both Loisos and Tipping have been named in HKS’s Third-Party Complaint in

7 this matter (Doc. No. 22), and were planning to respond to that Third-Party Complaint on or
8 before January 24, 2013;
9

Whereas on January 8, 2013, Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant Architectural Resources

10 Group, Inc. (“ARG”) filed a Motion to Dismiss or for More Definite Statement and Motion to
11 Strike (Doc. No. 28) of HKS’s counter-claims, with hearing set for February 15, 2013 (herein, the
12 “ARG Motion to Dismiss”);
13

Whereas, ARG Motion to Dismiss challenges the same pleading which alleges HKS’s

14 claims against Loisos and Tipping;
15

Whereas, Loisos, Tipping and HKS believe that the Court’s ruling on the pending ARG

16 Motion to Dismiss will also provide guidance with respect to the claims alleged against Loisos and
17 Tipping, as set forth in HKS’s Third-Party Complaint (Doc. No. 22), and wish to effectuate a
18 standstill with regard to their rights until after the Court’s ruling on the pending ARG Motion;
19

Whereas, the parties herein believe that this stipulation will avoid redundancy of motion

20 practice and briefing on matters already before the Court with respect to HKS’s claims, thereby
21 conserving judicial and party resources; and
22

Therefore, Loisos, Tipping and HKS hereby stipulate to the following:

23

(1)

Loisos’s and Tipping’s time to respond to the HKS’ Third-Party Complaint will be

24 extended as described immediately below;
25

(2)

Following the Court’s ruling on ARG’s Motion to Dismiss, which is set to be heard

26 February 15, 2013, Loisos and Tipping will have the same time as ARG to respond to either (a)
27 HKS’s existing Third-Party Complaint if the ARG Motion to Dismiss is denied in full, or (b) to an
28

07465.0294/2529748.1

2
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR THIRD PARTY DEFENDANTS
LOISOS AND TIPPING’S RESPONSE TO HKS’ THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT
Case No. C-12-5787 SI

1 Amended Third-Party Complaint to be filed by HKS, if one is forthcoming following the Court’s
2 ruling on the ARG Motion to Dismiss.
3 DATED: January 18, 2013

SEVERSON & WERSON
A Professional Corporation

4
5

/s/ Peter C. Lyon
PETER C. LYON

By:

6

Attorneys for Loisos + Ubbelohde Assocates,
and Tipping + Mar Assoicates

7
8
9

I, Peter C. Lyon, am the user whose identification and password are being used to file this

10 stipulation. I hereby attest that Jay R. Houghton, the other signatory below, has concurred in the
11 filing of this document.
/s/ Peter C. Lyon
PETER C. LYON

12
13
14

DATED: January 18, 2013

Smith, Currie & Hancock LLP

15
/s/ Jay R. Houghton
Jay R. Houghton

By:

16
17

Attorneys for Counsel for HKS, Inc.

18
19
20

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

21
22

DATED: JANUARY ___, 2013
22

_______________________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28

07465.0294/2529748.1

3
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR THIRD PARTY DEFENDANTS
LOISOS AND TIPPING’S RESPONSE TO HKS’ THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT
Case No. C-12-5787 SI