Baird v. Office Depot

Filing 72

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 69 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER STIPULATED REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER filed by Office Depot. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/21/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/21/2014)

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

MICHAEL E. BREWER, Bar No. 177912
[e-mail]
PHILIP A. SIMPKINS, Bar No. 246635
[e-mail]
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
Treat Towers
1255 Treat Boulevard, Suite 600
Walnut Creek, California 94597
Telephone:
925.932.2468
Facsimile:
925.946.9809
Attorneys for Defendant
OFFICE DEPOT, INC.
RICHARD M. ROGERS, Bar No. 045843
[e-mail]
LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD M. ROGERS
100 Bush Street, #1980
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone:
415.981.9788
Facsimile:
415.981.9798
Attorney for Plaintiff
MICHAEL BARID
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
Treat Towers
1255 Treat Boulevard
Suite 600
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
925.932.2468

MICHAEL BAIRD,
Plaintiff,
v.
OFFICE DEPOT,

Case No. 3:12-CV-06316-EMC
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR
DISMISSAL OF AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE; AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER

Defendant.

WHEREAS, in light of the Court’s Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiff’s
Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, Defendant has reanalyzed the remaining affirmative defenses
and determined that it should voluntarily dismiss without prejudice the Tenth, Eighteenth,
Nineteenth, Twentieth, Fortieth, Forty-First, and Forty-Third Affirmative Defenses as they “are, in
effect, denials of liability” with respect to elements on which Plaintiff has the burden of proof, and
WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred regarding Defendant’s Fifth and Sixth
(NO. 3:12-CV-06316-EMC)

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES WITHOUT
PREJUDICE; [PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2
3
4
5
6

Affirmative Defenses and Defendant has agreed to dismiss those defenses without prejudice,
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the undersigned parties,
through their counsel of record:
1.

That Defendant’s Fifth, Sixth, Tenth, Eighteenth, Nineteenth, Twentieth, Fortieth,

Forty-First, and Forty-Third Affirmative Defenses be dismissed without prejudice;
2.

That such dismissals shall not bar Defendant from arguing at trial that Plaintiff cannot

7

establish the essential elements of his claims based on the same underlying facts Defendant

8

previously offered in support of the dismissed affirmative defenses.

9

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

10
11

DATED: March 20, 2014

/S/ Philip A. Simpkins
MICHAEL E. BREWER
PHILIP A. SIMPKINS
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
Attorneys for Defendant, OFFICE DEPOT, INC.

DATED: March 20, 2014

/S/ Richard M. Rogers
RICHARD M. ROGERS
LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD M. ROGERS
Attorney for Plaintiff, MICHAEL BAIRD

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

I, the filer of this document, attest that all other signatories listed, and on whose behalf the
filing is submitted, concur in the filing’s content and have authorized the filing.

21
22
23

/S/ Philip A. Simpkins
MICHAEL E. BREWER
PHILIP A. SIMPKINS
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
Attorneys for Defendant, OFFICE DEPOT, INC.

DATED: March 20, 2014

24
25
26
27
28
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
Treat Towers
1255 Treat Boulevard
Suite 600
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
925.932.2468

(NO. 3:12-CV-06316-EMC)

2.

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES WITHOUT
PREJUDICE; [PROPOSED] ORDER

[PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2
3
4

1.

Defendant’s Fifth, Sixth, Tenth, Eighteenth, Nineteenth, Twentieth, Fortieth, Forty-

First, and Forty-Third Affirmative Defenses shall be dismissed without prejudice;
2.

Such dismissals shall not bar Defendant from arguing at trial that Plaintiff cannot

5

establish the essential elements of his claims based on the same underlying facts Defendant

6

previously offered in support of the dismissed affirmative defenses.

RT

13

ER

15

R NIA

n

M. Che

H

14

dward
Judge E

FO

NO

12

VED
APPRO

LI

11

Firmwide:125873863.1 063095.1058

HON. EDWARD M. CHEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

A

10

Dated: __ 3/21
_______________, 2014

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

9

S

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNIT
ED

7

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
Treat Towers
1255 Treat Boulevard
Suite 600
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
925.932.2468

(NO. 3:12-CV-06316-EMC)

3.

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES WITHOUT
PREJUDICE; [PROPOSED] ORDER